Invading ESPN - Marvel Comics "Secret Invasion" embraces change and confuses viewers

Multi-part, giant cross-title event sure to Change The Face Of The Marvel Universe Forever, about the attempted takeover of Earth by a race of shape-changing aliens who have infiltrated our most trusted institutions.


OK, this one's a bit of an oddity. So, Marvel Comics is in the middle of "Secret Invasion," a multi-part, giant cross-title event sure to Change The Face Of The Marvel Universe Forever, about the attempted takeover of Earth by a race of shape-changing aliens who have infiltrated our most trusted institutions.

Not reading it personally, but following the coverage; by all accounts, it's generally well done and well received. io9 has an article about a TV spot for Secret Invasion, designed to generate traffic to the event's Web site, that ran on ESPN the other night. 

Several of the comments on the article have to do with targeting and demographics — why run an ad for sci-fi-inspired comic book series on a sports network? Somewhere in there, one commenter notes that that it was during a baseball show, and that given the nature of baseball fans and fantasy sports participants, there might actually be some crossover in interest. Kind of the way that, with this post, I'm hoping there's enough crossover in interest between the Adgrunts and the geeks (or is that nerds?) to get into the Hall of Fame. But other commenters note — and I have to agree — that the ad just isn't really very good. For me to welcome our new Alien Overlords, I'd have to believe that they could put together a better 1:23 ad than that. It's neither clever and futuristic enough, nor does it really get the smarminess and cheesiness of a political attack ad (and it's not like we're lacking for examples of those). Even if an advanced extraterrestrial race only had access to lots (and lots) of stock footage, I'd hope they'd have an editor who could tighten it all up. The premise is fine, and it's really just a teaser, but the whole thing is kind of … leaden. I'm sure it's going to get noticed simply because of the novelty of an ad for a comic book! on a sports channel!, but it does seem like a missed opportunity. It'll be interesting to see the response.

Adland® is supported by your donations alone. You can help us out by buying us a Ko-Fi coffee.
Anonymous Adgrunt's picture
Files must be less than 1 MB.
Allowed file types: jpg jpeg gif png wav avi mpeg mpg mov rm flv wmv 3gp mp4 m4v.
Neo's picture

Neat. War of the worlds!

Dabitch's picture

Obviously I had to take that linked GEEK or NERD quiz and I got this result;

Score: 16 points. You're a nerd. You or your subject is a nerd, with tendencies toward the real world, even if it is a world of computers and quantum physics. Talk to a nerd whe when your desktop crashes or you need someone to explain what the big deal is about the Large Hadron Collider.

Gee, I thought I was a geek.

AlphaSquirrel's picture

Nerd, too. The explanation — such as it is — is in the article that went along with the quiz.

Dabitch's picture

Well, if we ask google Geeks are computer nerds. Hahah, I keed. In Swedish people just call me "nörd".

AlphaSquirrel's picture

Sigh. Imagine if Don LaFontaine was still around — can't you just hear that voice saying, "In Swedish … they called her nörd."?

Dabitch's picture

*MOahahahaha* Man, he was the best.

Allan1's picture

Wouldn't it be closer to "In a Swedish world, ...". (Or maybe, "In a world where, they speak Swedish,...")?

Allan1's picture

I ranked as a Nerd also. (I think it was 17 points).

It seemed like the difference between nerd and geek is defined (for this test at least) as geeks being more into fantasy than future & current technology.

My problem is that I'm equally comfortable in the technological future, the present, the recent past, the historical past, the archeological past, the paleotological past, the cosmological past, and various fantasy realms. The first time I read Chaucer in the Middle English, I understood 90% without help, and learned the pronunciation rapidly. I seem to get jokes in Shakepeare that most people miss (although my wife thinks that Romeo and Juliet is actually a farce, with the title "Romeo and Juliet, a Tragedy" being satirical) - some of which have been confirmed by further reading in some scholarly works.

I see no contradiction between the history of the universe (and evolution) versus religion - just different aspects of the whole. (I see religion in Quantum Mechanics).

I can look at an area I know, and see in my minds eye what it looked like 150 years ago; and 200 miliion years ago, as well. To me, if we were able to look at one person's life and follow it everywhere, it would look much like a vaguely human-shaped, flesh (pick your shade) colored worm (with lots of wardrobe changes!:-)).

I think this test is wrong, because I simply choose the things that would be easiest for me - i.e. easy work, more comfort. The exception was the Han Solo question - I'd rather hang out with him than Jean Luc, he seems to be more fun and more likely to drink alot, versus Jean Luc, who you seem to have to work on for some time to get him to loosen up.