|
|
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 jensaltmann on Jun 1, 2011 10:45:41 GMT -8
Are all fannish franchises doomed to implode? Should I start worrying about Who? Yes and yes. Because these fannish franchises? They drag on forever and ever, and eventually the creators run out of ideas. But both the fans and the owners are not willing to put a franchise out of its misery. So they go waaay past the point of where they should have quit. It's inevitable. |
|
|
|
Post by michaelpaciocco on Jun 1, 2011 11:02:30 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. Morbid curiosity - what books are these? Are all fannish franchises doomed to implode? Should I start worrying about Who? Yes and Yes, Eventually. Ask any fan of the Lone Ranger, or the Shadow, or Zorro or Sherlock Holmes. 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. |
|
|
|
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 michaelpaciocco on Jun 1, 2011 12:16:29 GMT -8
Never heard of them - and that's probably a good thing. Oh well.
|
|
|
|
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 michaelpaciocco on Jun 1, 2011 20:44:28 GMT -8
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. A lot of fandoms have been like that for a long time, in my opinion. There's also a reason I don't interact with mainstream fandom online - I don't agree with them or what they are selling, promoting. 2) Running out. Particularly as many of the new ones feel darker than needed. 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. 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. And that's a function of the corporate comics culture where no one with half a brain would or should bring their A-game or any creative input to an "industry" that time and time and time and TIME again will fuck over anyone who inputs even the slightest creative spark. Check out Tony Isabella's forum, or read any thing on any creator from Kirby to Claremont to Gerber to Moore on how "well-respected" they are creatively. Hell, I'll put down solid money in 25 years we'll be hearing about Johns and Bendis struggling to make ends meet and stay in their homes. I will have no pity for them however, because they've had ample opportunity to make changes and well, they wanted things the way they were. 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. 2) Fandom has shown, and is showing now, impossibly high levels of loyalty to the COMPANY over the CREATORS. We're all guilty of it every time we pick up a Superman comic or cartoon. We are culpable in that - to a small degree, perhaps negligible, perhaps not. But do we do much to support rights for creators to be creative? I'm as guilty as anyone else here, but it does need to be said - what is our moral obligation here? You add all this together, and yes, strip-mining the past until there's nothing left but sand is the only plausible course of action. And as far as finding fans for new things - it takes work and time, but hey, it happens. There's always a way. |
|
|
|
Post by jensaltmann on Jun 1, 2011 22:44:49 GMT -8
Morbid curiosity - what books are these? The Typhon Pact, but the Trek novels have been a bit depressing for a while. I used to read the Trek novels when they alternated - one month TOS, one month TNG, one month DS9... Then, after the first crossover, they launched into crossoveritis. And trilogies. And sagas. Suddenly, instead of getting to pick and choose the interesting sounding stand-alone novels, you had to start reading them all, or lose context. That was when I dropped out. In Star Wars, I dropped out when they got into the Yuuzhan Vong war. Again, too much continuity, more than I want out of novels. Plus, I simply didn't find interesting what happened there. |
|
|
|
Post by jensaltmann on Jun 1, 2011 22:51:37 GMT -8
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. A lot of fandoms have been like that for a long time, in my opinion. There's also a reason I don't interact with mainstream fandom online - I don't agree with them or what they are selling, promoting. Totally agreed. Kirk knows that one of the reasons why I stayed away from Dr. Who as long as I did was the behavior of the fans. I observed that only through his LJ, but the rabid hatred that I found there (hint: Jesse would fit right in) made me feel that these are not people with whom I'd want to be associated in any way. 2) Fandom has shown, and is showing now, impossibly high levels of loyalty to the COMPANY over the CREATORS. We're all guilty of it every time we pick up a Superman comic or cartoon. We are culpable in that - to a small degree, perhaps negligible, perhaps not. But do we do much to support rights for creators to be creative? I'm as guilty as anyone else here, but it does need to be said - what is our moral obligation here? That's one of the points that the proponents of Public Domain keep raising: Steamboat Willy and Superman need to fall out of copyright and into the Public Domain -- "so that I can write the character." Even the supposedly creative people are like that -- they don't want to create anything new, they want to play with the old toys, but without having to worry about WFH. It's one of the reasons why I'm against the Public Domain, because so long as those iconic properties are under copyright, these people are forced to come up with something new. (That doesn't mean I support the copyrights being held by corporations. It's the creators and their families who should make money with it ad infinitum.) |
|
|
|
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 jensaltmann on Jun 2, 2011 2:47:17 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. |
|
|
|
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 jensaltmann on Jun 2, 2011 7:35:18 GMT -8
"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. How often did Palpatine return in the SWEU? As a clone and otherwise? Twice? Thrice? |
|
|
|
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 michaelpaciocco on Jun 2, 2011 16:48:43 GMT -8
"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. The Borg. The Borq Queen. Q. Klingons. And as stated, the Doctor and the Daleks, the Master, etc etc. |
|
