| Author |
|
Darren Ashmore
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 953
|
| Posted: 11 April 2017 at 1:46pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Money talks people :)Why create something new for the 'big corporations' and get 10% of the take when you can save your really good ideas and go to Image or some such and get the full 100% plus all that lovely cash from toys and movies ....
Now don't misunderstand me, I'm all for creator rights but gone are the days when writers and artists created new characters because they loved, and were thrilled to be working in, the medium.
I call it 'Mark Millar syndrome' :)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 15881
|
| Posted: 11 April 2017 at 1:50pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
I'd add Elektra to that list of Marvel characters. Not a new Spider-Man, but managed to get her own movie. First appeared in 1981.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Eric Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 October 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 2322
|
| Posted: 11 April 2017 at 3:23pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Squirrel Girl s getting her own TV show! Well, it's the NEW WARRIORS, but it looks like the emphasis will be on Squirrel Girl. (Hmm...does that mean Squirrel Girl and Speedball will be teammates?)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Andrew W. Farago
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 July 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4079
|
| Posted: 11 April 2017 at 5:23pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
If you give fans a Red Hulk or a new person in the Iron Man armor, you can potentially cash in when Marvel makes cartoons, movies, and merchandise with that character. Probably more revenue than you'd get with a brand-new character, since that new character won't get much of a push and fans and retailers won't order books with the new character anyway.
People working on the X-books were explicitly told not to create new characters while Marvel and Fox were sorting out whether or not to even promote the X-books at all anymore, so it's not necessarily just the creators that are holding back. If Marvel's not giving creators incentive to introduce new characters and if retailers aren't going to have your back, either, there's not much reason to stray from the tried and true characters.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 8515
|
| Posted: 11 April 2017 at 10:22pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Squirrel Girl is fun, but her feature contains next to no social commentary or cynicism, so she is not Marvel's next Howard the Duck. She might be their next Patsy Walker or Chili. She appears too often to be their next Impossible Man. She-Hulk, maybe?
Hopefully, she'll remain cynicism-free for a long time to come. Inevitably, someone will think themselves the cleverest boy who ever lived by running her over dead with U.S. 1*, but until then she's a breath of fresh air.
* See also: Ch'p.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 8515
|
| Posted: 11 April 2017 at 10:25pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
As for Speedball being the next Spider-Man, I think the smart money around that time was riding on Slapstick. I'm pretty sure Spellbinder and Sleepwalker were never really in the running.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Trevor Thompson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 13 June 2015
Posts: 346
|
| Posted: 12 April 2017 at 3:58am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
If you give fans a Red Hulk or a new person in the Iron Man armor, you can potentially cash in when Marvel makes cartoons, movies, and merchandise with that character. Probably more revenue than you'd get with a brand-new character, since that new character won't get much of a push and fans and retailers won't order books with the new character anyway.
People working on the X-books were explicitly told not to create new characters while Marvel and Fox were sorting out whether or not to even promote the X-books at all anymore, so it's not necessarily just the creators that are holding back. If Marvel's not giving creators incentive to introduce new characters and if retailers aren't going to have your back, either, there's not much reason to stray from the tried and true characters.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I know you're right but surely Marvel would be better off creating new characters and selling it as no1 considering they love rebooting books at least once every two years.Or better yet rekindle Marvel Presents and use it as a basis of creating new characters and writing short stories for minor ones who may well go on to become successful.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Eric Sofer
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 31 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 4789
|
| Posted: 12 April 2017 at 4:06am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Robert, remember that the Guardians of the Galaxy is also a derivative title. That's a big part of why I'm amused by the movie, but I don't like it..
It seems that most new characters who are "hits" are created at what we used to call independent publishers... where they can be creator owned and make a ton of money for the creator.
I don't know how new characters work at DC or Marvel, but I'm not sure that it's worth presenting new characters - on the chance that those do hit, the writers' contracts may be prohibitive on returns (which is perfectly legit - it is a legal agreement after all.) It just may be so poor on pay that it's not worth the time or effort to be original.
What a shame THAT would be...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Olav Bakken
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 June 2014
Posts: 241
|
| Posted: 12 April 2017 at 7:30am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
The original Groot, the original Rocket Raccoon, Drax and others. Their present incarnations are so different from the original versions regarding background, behavior, abilities and personality that they might as well have been new characters. Instead of a raccoon Marvel could have used a fox, and few would have made a connection to Rocket.
And for the modern audience and readers, many characters are so obscure (for them) that they are practically new anyway.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132628
|
| Posted: 12 April 2017 at 8:00am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
The original Groot, the original Rocket Raccoon, Drax and others. Their present incarnations are so different from the original versions regarding background, behavior, abilities and personality that they might as well have been new characters. Instead of a raccoon Marvel could have used a fox, and few would have made a connection to Rocket.•• Worth considering that Bill Mantlo is probably receiving a nice chunk of change for Rocket, which he very much needs.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Vinny Valenti
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 8071
|
| Posted: 12 April 2017 at 9:47am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
I was annoyed at first to find that they dropped the "Raccoon" from his name, thinking it was Marvel being embarrassed about using the full name.
But in the movie, Starlord calls him a Raccoon, and Rocket has no idea what that word means. That does make sense - why would an alien genetically-engineered creature know what an earth-based animal species is? So with that, I can accept why he would simply go by Rocket in the movies.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 16464
|
| Posted: 12 April 2017 at 12:43pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
I wonder if Marvel downplays calling the character "Rocket Raccoon" in favor of simply calling him "Rocket" because of any legal concerns over the inspiration for the character, The Beatles song "Rocky Raccoon"?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Topic Closed)
