|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 2, 2011 7:53:12 GMT -8
I'm not sure veto power is part of it. Only money. But I'd have to look it up. I haven't followed the case totally, so I don't know what, beyond money, is being haggled about, but if someone owns the rights, that includes the right to say, "Go fuck yourselves." Let me check something... Yes, that's true if someone has SOLE copyright. But DC will still share joint copyright for another 2 years (when the Shuster heirs get a shot). I'm pretty sure that means no veto.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 2, 2011 7:47:48 GMT -8
How often did Palpatine return in the SWEU? As a clone and otherwise? Twice? Thrice? 3 times, but it was all by the same author (and, indeed, could all be considered part of the same storyline). And I honestly don't recall fans clamoring for his return (more the opposite. That was the era of the "Superweapon of the week" and fans grew tired of it)
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 2, 2011 7:42:25 GMT -8
I can't say I agree, because I have a completely different view of PD.
It's all about MONEY. Who profits from a particular IP? Who gets to say "You can't reprint this story without my permission, giving me a share of your profits"?
It's not about derivative works at all. For the most part, that's actually trademark law, which is a different kettle of fish (and, in those cases, a trademark must be actively used to be maintained).
The reason perpetual copyrights are not used is that it means that (for example) every single descendant of Charles Dickens would have to be paid if someone wanted to publish a version of A Christmas Carol. Not a sequel, not an adaptation. Just the original text.
And, as time passes, the list of heirs grows larger. And larger. And will soon become completely untenable. So, the book will never be reprinted. And then, after all the copies have decayed, it will never be seen again.
Not a good idea, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 2, 2011 7:30:27 GMT -8
And can, potentially, veto. I'm not sure veto power is part of it. Only money. But I'd have to look it up.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 2, 2011 7:28:29 GMT -8
And outside of comics, that mindset is unheard of. Trekkers & Warsies tend to want NEW stories, not "They need to bring back Vader & Palpatine "What should Abrams do for Star Trek Reboot Sequel?" "Klingons!" "KHAAAAAAN!" Nope, not unheard of. The magic word being Reboot. In the "classic" universe, you don't get that sort of request.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 2, 2011 2:30:56 GMT -8
Doubtful. Even if DC didn't want to use the elements in question, it wouldn't be need a reboot of the entire line. And WB is more likely to pay to license the characters, since the Siegels couldn't actually DO anything with those rights without the trademarks.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 2, 2011 2:27:16 GMT -8
The DCU relaunch stuff and the ensuing conversation on the different comic forums got me thinking about the handling of different media franchises. Mainly, Japanese superhero shows. So, I was wondering if anyone thought that the Japanese superhero show format could work in the American superhero comic? What I mean by that is reinventing the franchise every year or so. Do a year long, self contained story and once it's done take a few months off then roll out the next "season" which would be a new take on the core concept. Wash, rinse, repeat. It's not quote as clearcut as that, as some shows (e.g Kamen Rider Den-O) get milked long after the TV show proper ends.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 2, 2011 2:25:20 GMT -8
Perhaps, but I'm having quite a bit of fun with Love and Capes, PS238 and Atomic Robo - none of which I would classify as "dark". Oh, and I'm devoting more time to my RPG stuff, where I can sort of have worlds that aren't worlds of neverending suck. Those aren't franchises, a la Marvel or Trek. It's the difference between having fans and having a fandom. However, and this is where I believe you and I diverge, I put a fair amount of blame on that so-called fandom, for two reasons:
1) Fandom, by its very nature, thrives on nostalgia - they/we want the next "Definitive" Batman/Joker confrontation (or Doctor/Dalek, or what have you), and nothing, not the Dark Knight, not the Dark Knight Returns, NOTHING, will ever ever take that need away from them. So long as this craving for nostalgia is there to be sated, the economic impulse will be to give it a fix.
I don't think this applies to as many fans as you think. Maybe in some specific cases, but (for example) I haven't heard anyone clamoring for yet another Spider-Man/Green Goblin story. And outside of comics, that mindset is unheard of. Trekkers & Warsies tend to want NEW stories, not "They need to bring back Vader & Palpatine" That sounds more like loyalty to the character, not the story, to me. It's really no different than someone who can't miss a single episode of a soap opera, no matter how stupid the plot.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 1, 2011 14:06:58 GMT -8
That said, two positive things: 1) Fandom is what you make it and who you connect with - that's the important thing - doesn't change what the people who control it do. 2) There's always new fandoms. 1) It's harder and harder to connect with fans, though. Too many seem less interested in talking about stories than complaining about/defending creators. Mostly the former. 2) Running out. Particularly as many of the new ones feel darker than needed. You know what annoys me the most about all this? Creators closing doors, instead of opening them (and exploring new potential ideas), and either wallowing in "realism" or retelling old stories in new ways.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 1, 2011 12:13:51 GMT -8
Morbid curiosity - what books are these? The Typhon Pact, but the Trek novels have been a bit depressing for a while.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 1, 2011 7:55:33 GMT -8
I used to be a Trekkie.
Then they made Star Trek Nemesis & Enterprise, and a bunch of books showing how the UFP is falling apart.
I used to be a Warsie.
Then they decided that showing how the characters were failures was better than a happy ending.
I used to read superhero comics.
Then they decided that overpriced events and editorial driven plots were better than good storytelling.
Are all fannish franchises doomed to implode? Should I start worrying about Who?
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on Jun 1, 2011 2:01:40 GMT -8
After an initial burst of nerdrage, I've reverted back to apathy. Seriously, rebooting or renumbering will not make the stories better. Only god storytelling will do that. And you don't NEED reboots or renumbering if you have good stories. Furthermore, I seriously doubt there's a massive number of readers out there holding off on buying Superman because they can't get into his continuity. This is Superman we are talking about here. Bedouins in the heart of the Sahara know who he is. People don't buy his comics, because they SUCK. I don't think youthening him, hooking him up with WW, and giving him a suit I saw in Wizard in 2002 will change that. This is ego and short-term thinking. In a year, they'll do something else.
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on May 29, 2011 15:40:01 GMT -8
On the same note, something I just read on a blog called the Absorbacon:
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on May 29, 2011 13:54:25 GMT -8
"Look! I have a crotch! Whee!" In order to masqerade as Batgirl, Bruce Wayne was forced to strap two balloons to his chest.... No joke. I just love that pose
|
|
|
Post by Mario Di Giacomo on May 29, 2011 8:34:31 GMT -8
I've got the perfect pic: Pity about the watermark, though.
|
|