Showing posts with label empire. Show all posts
Showing posts with label empire. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Empire Magazine's Science Fiction Love; Spinoff to Follow?

The March 2011 issue of Empire magazine, the giant movie magazine from the UK, has a special section focusing on science fiction. This Sci Fi section is 32 pages long and features the exhaustive, well-assembled content for which Empire magazine is known.
I haven't read it yet; I've just returned from the magazine shop. But just a quick perusal of the articles in this section are what made me commit to buying the periodical. (Several articles on knockoffs of Star Wars, for example. I'm there.) 

It also made me wonder: Is this a market test for a possible science-fiction spinoff magazine launch? Something to take on SFX and Sci Fi Now, two other oversized, attitude-filled UK science-fiction film mags? Those two magazines also are published by large UK media houses, which put out tons of periodicals, including SFX parent Future's Total Film magazine, which competes directly with Empire, as far as I can tell.

Empire is part of Bauer Consumer Media, which is a unit/division/branch/whatever of German media Giant Bauer Media Group. They own zillions of newspapers and magazines across Europe, plus radio stations and other media. Looks to me like they have the capacity to do just about anything they want.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Tron and Tron Legacy on Magazine Covers: Then and Now

It appears that the electric blue-green is the cover color of the season, as magazines far and wide put Tron Legacy on their covers. That spawned a quest by me to look at how the Tron sequel's covers compare with the magazine covers that featured the original Tron film in 1982. So, from Starlog to American Cinematographer to SFX and beyond, here are the old and new.

Most images can be seen in larger size by clicking on their small images below.

Original Tron:







Tron Legacy:









Tuesday, November 3, 2009

100 New Magazines Launched in October? How Many Are Worth Keeping?

Mr. Magazine, aka Samir Husni, writes that he notes 100 new magazine titles were on the stands in the month of October. From the sampling posted on his blog, I'm amused by some of these magazines. Does the world really need Angels and Miracles? or Men Fetish? Couldn't those two titles have been combined into a new-age evangelical gay leather magazine? After all, it's all about niche marketing these days, isn't it?

Anyway, Herr Zeitschriften says there are two interesting things about this avalanche of launches: There are lots of one-shot magazines, and the cover prices are somewhat hefty (a rough average of $8.66). He makes a good case that one-shots are not going to save the magazine industry, but I'm not sure that's necessarily so. Some one-shots are indeed produced simply to soak up newsstand space, or to steal the thunder from a market niche rival. But other one-shots are test magazines, and if they're successful, they can go on to long, happy periodical lives. Starlog magazine started life as a one-shot dedicated to Star Trek; when the distributor wasn't interested, it was bulked up with other science fiction articles and it went on to be a science-fiction media behemoth for three decades and the flagship of an enterprising (forgive the term) magazine company. That same company relaunched Comics Scene in the mid-1980s as a one-shot; it did so well, it was launched as a quarterly (that became a bimonthly that grew to a nine-times-a-year frequency) and lasted something like eight years.

So I welcome a one-shot publication. If it's well done, and it doesn't look like a cheap knockoff (such as, oh, a hastily assembled "tribute" to a recently deceased celebrity, for example), then I think it actually boosts the claim of magazines as a viable market where ideas can be floated, launched, retooled, and enjoyed.

As far as the high cover prices, I'm actually all for that, as long as we get our money's worth. That's been a theme of this blog for some months, in fact. I've urged a number of publications to take that route, as part of a way of freeing themselves from the addiction to the fickle (and shackling) advertising dollar. If you have a weak editorial product and you're third in your market niche, then this strategy won't work. If you're already a second- or third-buy decision for your potential reader, then boosting your cover price from $6.50 to $8.99 is going to give those people several incentives not to purchase it. But if you're the market leader or a strong second in your niche, a higher price that comes with quality and quantity -- more pages, added investigative or long-form journalism, new columnists, a beautiful redesign -- then you might just save your magazine in the long run.

Think about it. Playboy is still charging just a couple dollars more an issue (by cover price) than it did a quarter century ago, and its subscription price is pretty much the same (and even less, in some of its offers). Yet it just cut its rate base by nearly 40 percent. If they know they're going to be losing readers, why not boost the cover price a couple dollars -- yes, a couple whole dollars -- and deliver more and better editorial in the process. Their readers, in particular, will reward them; Playboy has famously loyal readers.

Starlog could relaunch at $9.99 an issue and boost the page count from what it was in its late run (around 84, including covers). After all, the science fiction media magazine field is no longer dominated by American publishers selling $7.00 or $8.00 magazines. American publishers are barely visible in the SF media magazine field these days; it's dominated by UK publishers, whose magazines sell for $9.99 or even $11.99 -- and deliver a lot more pages and editorial content. Those are the new competition, and there's no need to try to undersell them. They've raised the bar, so compete with them head-on.


On Sunday, I bought two magazines, neither of which is a regular buy for me but instead an occasional buy: Empire and SFX magazines. The cover price of both of them was $9.99, and each had more than 145 pages of full-color content. Why did I buy them? Well, I wouldn't buy an American mainstream film magazine because I find them to be boring and unimaginatively written, but Empire has spirit and great reach into the industry and a vast array of content. As for SFX, I would buy an American competitor if there was one out there worth reading. But with Starlog out of print (along with fellow casualties such as Cinefantastique), I've finally given up looking for an SF magazine not published by Titan magazines or Future, both from the UK. (Hmm, maybe this is the magazine I should be trying to launch ....)

But the $9.99 cover price didn't scare me off, and neither magazine shows any sign of imminent death. So how long will it take for magazine publishers in the United States to stop trying to do cheap-and-weak magazines and start doing pricey-but-quality magazines? If Samir Husni's blog is any indication, we might be headed in that direction at long last.

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Magazine Errors: Guest Editors

A thankfully infrequent but unthankfully not extinct publicity stunt that some magazines pull is the use of a celebrity guest editor, someone who helps plan, write, design and -- of course -- promote the issue.

I'm tempted to try to come up with some fake guest-editor/magazine pairings, but the reality has been even sillier: Remember Roseanne guest editing The New Yorker? Or how about the latest: comedian Stephen Colbert guest editing an issue of Newsweek?

Yikes. Now, I love Colbert's work. He's not only funny, I think he's got real intelligence and rare understanding of the importance of the things he targets with wit. (Yes, count me among those who thought his performance at the 2006 White House Correspondents' Dinner was a rare act of valuable court-jestering in a country that has come to believe that film and television is only for entertaining, not for actually making a point.)

But Newsweek? I also like the new Newsweek, as I've noted here. So this isn't a case of me disliking either the guest editor or magazine. But I think Newsweek will undercut its credibility as a serious journalistic enterprise with this stunt. A few more 25-year-olds might pick up that issue, but probably a few less 50-year-olds (you know, the consumers with all the money) will do so.

Empire magazine, a large film monthly from the UK, celebrated its 20th anniversary with a special issue guest edited by Stephen Spielberg. Again, I have no problem with either the magazine or the guest editor; Empire is consistently a high-quality publication that probably only errs in occasionally giving more attitude than substance; and Spielberg is an extraordinary talent as well as being a man of brave social conscience. But one can't read Empire ever again and think it's providing an independent look at the film world. How much can you criticize a film if the director is a potential editor? How much can a reader trust your positive review of a film from a potential editor? How important is the magazine's independence compared to the extra copies they expect to be bought because of Spielberg's involvement?

My biggest problem is just that the practice of using guest editors undercuts the very magazine it's trying to promote. A magazine is not an internet public forum. It is a particular world view designed and shaped by a team of editors and publishers. It's their take on whatever subject matter is the focus of the magazine (the week's news, the music world, science fiction films, whatever). And readers need to be able to think that they're getting that point of view (however broad or narrow) straight and not filtered through too much whoring for money (yeah, not through too much whoring -- everyone knows there'll be some).

So, what about Meryl Streep guest editing Vogue? Or the Octomom guest editing The Economist?

Nah, I just can't top Roseanne and The New Yorker.

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Saudi Arabia Press Restrictions
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical HumorKeyboard Cat