Captain America Lives Again

It seems in a few months Captain America will be reborn and turn up alive again at Marvel Comics. I think this is partially a reason why comic book fans, who have grown older have become cynical of comic books, or lost interest.

Why care if a character dies, when you know they will just eventually return, and at some point return to their status quo. Dying in comic book universes mean nothing, because if a character even has a minor league fan base, and profit can be made from them they will return. Think of all the C- characters like Wonder Man who die, only to return. If a C- character won’t stay dead, do you think a major character will?

I think with an aging audience, some people have caught on to the fact that, for example: Will Spider-Man’s identity be revealed next issue? Will Wolverine survive that fatal shot next month?

The cliffhanger really has no merit anymore for the next issue, because given enough time or years a character will always return to their status quo, and that big incident that happened is forgotten like it never existed.

That’s my thoughts on it, what about you?

Just got finished seeing the movie Terminator Salvation. I couldn’t believe Night at the Museum 2 was a box office hit and landed number 1 and that a Terminator movie was knocked for a loop to a far distant second place.

I think it’s a real shame because I will admit, I didn’t know much, other then the trailer and one plot point, about how this film would be.

But overall I really liked this film. In a film of this nature, it delivered in my opinion what it should and then some. And the ending was one where it could be open to sequels, or it could end there. But they give you a complete story.

With that said I wonder: Should they make any more Terminator movies? Or end this on a high note with this one? Because this sure as heck blows away that crap called Terminator 3.

I ask this because of the low box office take in the U.S. market. Maybe the International Market will make for better sales and a good box office total? Or that DVD sales will make up for the difference?

And with the Terminator Sarah Conner Chronicles TV show cancelled, and now the movie Terminator Salvation doing below expectations. MAYBE people are tired of this franchise in America, and it’s not worth pursuing anymore? Maybe the horse is dead? After all, the people already know the plot. It’s man versus machine, and maybe their bored of this plot and have been their, done that? How many times can you exploit the same idea?

===================

While watching this movie Sam Worthington and his character almost steal the film completely. After seeing the film, I thought this guy has the look, age, and body build to possibly make for a GREAT Captain America choice. If I were casting that film, this guy would be one of the top candidates for the roll. And the one I would choose.

===================

I was looking at the box office take and Will Ferrell in “Land of the Lost” is below expectations. Looking at his appearance on the Conan O’ Brien show, I think the past few years of box office success has finally caused him to have a big ego. Just something about his overall demeanor, the look in his eye, and gut feeling make me think he has a swelled ego. But that’s just my view on the matter. I guess only those working close with him would know the truth. But if he does have a big ego now, it wouldn’t be the first time this has happened to a celebrity, that’s for sure.

John Turitzin, Marvel’s general counsel and EVP of the executive office

During the presentation, Turitzin gave an overview of Marvel — a “cash machine,” he called it — and the various ways it makes money, from publishing and licensing to the more recently added Marvel Studios division. Like I said on Friday, one of the more interesting portions came when a comic fan in the audience asked about recent cost increases on some of Marvel’s more popular titles from $2.99 to $3.99.

When asked if Marvel would consider lowering the cover price if revenue started to drop, Turitzin said, “Our goal is to maximize our revenue, and if we’re not maximizing revenue then our pricing is wrong, and we have to take a look at that … so you can hope we see that attrition, and our prices come down.”

“We’re always testing our pricing on our comic books to see to the extent to which it is inelastic, and we can increase our profit in that business,” Turitzin said.

“We’re just looking to maximize our profits for that business while not alienating our own fan base by making them feel that they’re gouged, which I hope you don’t feel,” he told the fan.

$3.99 The Real Reason for the Increased Price

I took those quotes from a great Comic Book Resources . com article. Click the link above to get their.

Basically it’s admitted that they are pushing the boundaries on price increases to maximize their profits. And see what they can get away with, in terms of prices, before people stop buying their books.

I know a business is their to make a profit, but their is a difference between that and gouging your buying public to milk every dollar they can get from them.

I really like that last quote saying in essence: I hope you don’t feel that we’re price gouging you, but you know what? In truth we really are.

Unlike IDW, Image and other smaller publishers, people tend to forget about the comic book advertisments in Marvel Comics. Like DC Comics, both sell a lot of advertising space that brings in revenue. All things being equal, a Marvel or a DC comic should be cheaper then a smaller publisher because of the advertising revenue Marvel and DC get to off-set their price per issue costs. But if you have noticed, that is not the case. For example Image has the same price as a Marvel or a DC book. Yet Marvel and DC have prime advertising revenue space. Whereas Image has lesser space, or at least from prominent advertising companies that pay more.

But back to the main issue, it’s glad to hear someone at least be honest and admit, all things being equal. We’re increasing prices to gouge you, and see just how much we can milk from you. As we line our CEO pockets and give ourselves bonuses, that bonus alone is more then you probably make all year.

And in today’s economic climate, it sure is great to know corporate executives have our best interests at heart.

$3.99 an issue and no doubt increasing within a few years.

Type into google: “Why do DC Movies Suck” and you will find many links to Joss Whedon. You may know him best as the Buffy the Vampire creator.

In a nutshell he says that with the exception of Batman, the DC heroes were ‘like creating flawless gods. And that they were very much removed from humanity.’

I do agree that many DC heroes are too flawless, but I wouldn’t call them gods. And while I agree they lack connection to humanity. I think the real issue is many of the DC heroes are not very interesting, at least in terms of being movie material that the general box office public could accept.

Outside of Batman and the Superman properties, DC really does not have that many great characters that could translate well to the box office in my opinion.

Wonder Woman is a possible third movie that could translate well. But the whole Amazon, magic, other mysterious island culture race of warrior women makes this sound more like a Harry Potter type film. Then say a Spider-Man film where a guy just happens to get powers, but otherwise lives in a relatable environment in the city with family and his friends.

But look at the other DC properties after that. Many of them just have gimmicks and not much behind them.

I just don’t think the Flash with his only power gimmick of just running fast is material that will draw in much of the paying public.

Is the story of Hawkman and Hawkgirl enough to drive the buying public? A pair of heroes who basically have wings and can fly.

The Atom, a hero who can shrink down to ant size. Is this box office gold?

Martian Manhunter, an alien from Mars whose style is sort of like a second rate Superman. Can a movie trilogy be based on him?

Aquaman, who like the Sub-Mariner just lives in the water. I don’t think the buying public cares enough for either character to be box office hits. And like Wonder Woman, their environment makes them to unrelatable to the general public.

By now I think you get my general thoughts on this topic. And to be clear, it’s not to bash DC heroes. I think many DC heroes are great, but only for the comic buying audience. I just don’t think many of their characters translate well into box office material that the general public will pay to see. And most movie studios want superhero movies they can franchise.

With Marvel heroes, sure they have many like the DC example. Such as: Ant-Man, Sub-Mariner, Hawkeye, Vision, etc. that are great for a comic audience, but not a movie audience. I just think Marvel has a lot more heroes that can translate well into films because of their humanity, the environment they live in, and can connect on a deeper level with a public audience.

Also most of the Marvel heroes live in real American cities, this helps at another level because the general public can accept this. Whereas most DC heroes live in their own fictional cities.

And for the record, I don’t see Marvel’s Thor movie doing well. Like Wonder Woman I think it’s a tough sell for the general public.

The planned DC Green Lantern movie I think just might be DC’s only other fourth character that could do well in the box office. But I’m not betting much on it, especially if they show and talk about all the other Green Lantern’s out there, and how he’s just one of many and therefore not unique.

I saw the Watchmen movie a while ago, and I was thinking: This is the series that is so highly praised by the comic book fan community. Now we have a movie that is virtually a translation from panel to movie screen. You would think since it’s such a great translation, that the comics community would be praising it and it would be a blockbuster.

And this movie was, to say the least, more faithful to it’s comic book origins then any Marvel, or any other DC movie.

Well it seems that Watchmen was hardly a Hollywood Blockbuster in terms of critic reviews and box office total.

I think with making a comic book film, many comic book fans think the film should be 100% accurate to the comic book source material. (And yet when an example like this movie shows up, the general buying public is not there in full support.)

I think the comic fan base in terms of total box office, is only a small community whereas making a film for the general public is more important.

Look at films like the last few Spider-Man, Iron Man and Dark Knight films. None of them were 100% faithful to their comic book origins and their comic book stories. And those films did take creative liberties that their comic book counterparts did not have.

But what those films had was capturing the essence of their comic book properties, and translating a film that the general public could follow and accept.

I think that is the key to making a great comic book film that does well. It should capture the essence of the comic book property, and a story that can be accessed by the public.

Following the comic book material accurately is not a necessity. Creative license can and should be taken where it is appropriate.

Personally, I get tired of comic board comments of people complaining Ad nauseum why a film is not 100% comic accurate. As if a film should just be made for the comic collecting audience exclusively. Watchmen is a good example of why they should not be. I mean they were even so accurate as to include graphic scenes of Dr. Manhattan and frontal nudity. Hey director, Zack Snyder a little creative license there would not have hurt.

Looking at the latest sales numbers in terms of issues sold, on the ICV2.com website it says no comic sold over 100,000 copies.

No Comic Over 100K in March

My main guesses as to why this is happening is because of the downturn in the economy, plus the raised cover price of many comics costing $3.99 an issue.

In today’s world, and tough economy many people are cutting back on needless expenses. I’ve seen many restaurants close nearby me for example.

I guess people are wondering why should they pay over $20.00 for a meal, when they can eat much cheaper. They can try fast food take out shops for example.

Some things in today’s world are expenses we must pay. Such as housing, the electric bill, insurance, etc.

Other things like eating out at a fancy restaurant are luxury items. And comic book collecting is a luxury item.

If you are making comic books for a living, then that is your job. Part of how you make your income.

But as a buyer of comic books, what you have in fact is a luxury item. It’s not really something that is Must Buy, such as the above mentioned paying for your housing costs.

And one must question honestly, is buying a twenty two page comic book, delivering the bang for your buck that it used to??

It’s the same page count as books made thirty or more years ago.

I remember the days when I’d buy over 15 comics in one shot. Back then it only cost a few dollars.

Now for 15 books I’d cost you on average $45.00. And I see people in the store charging their credit card for comic book purchases. Something I never used to see.

Also when costs go up, people get more picky and expect ideally better quality in terms of what they consider good art and writing. And as costs go up, it’s only natural for people to drop books from their buy list.

I wonder at what point will rising comic book costs further erode their buying public’s fan base? Or if it isn’t already happening?

For example 3 comics will cost about $8 or more.

Yet for $8 I can buy a comic book action figure. And get more value from that action figure then from 3 comics.

Their are more diverse things to spend money freely on nowadays, from DVD’s, CD’s, etc.

Guess that’s why I mostly wait and buy trade paperbacks and hardcovers and get them on discounts. Or go to conventions to look through the cheap bins. Such as finding $3 books out last year that only cost .50 cents now.

But to be fair I see Many magazines close to the $9.00 range an issue for less then 100 pages. So their prices went up as well. Is it any wonder that magazine market sales are going downhill? But at least readers in the stores can look through and read the hole issue in the bookstore.

Wolverine is A Patchwork Character

When I hear the casual comment by writers that: ‘Wolverine was created by Len Wein’ I can’t help but wince.

When you look at Wolverine as we know him today, you have to realize he is a virtual patchwork character with no one major creator responsible for the overall character and what he has become.

What I mean by this is look at all the other major heroes and characters. They had one or two creators make the hero, origin, powers, supporting characters, and main villains.

For example, with FF: Lee and Kirby made the FF, Doctor Doom, Galactus, Silver Surfer, The Inhumans, etc.

With Spider-Man it was Lee and Ditko making Spidey, his main villains, supporting characters.

Batman, it was Kane and Finger who brought that world around.

You get the picture.

Anyway, with Wolverine, who was responsible for his overall character? Answer, not any one particular creator. The main ones I know of are:

To name a character Wolverine. The credit probably goes to Roy Thomas who wanted him a Canadian hero. But from what I’ve read no one recalls exactly the circumstances of who said what, so it was either him or Len Wein. Whatever the case:

Len Wein got the initial idea rolling with Roy Thomas. However Wein imagined him as a teenager and the claws were only a part of the gloves.

John Romita Sr. drew the initial costume, but Gil Kane redesigned by accident, the mask Wolverine wears now.

Dave Cockrum gave us the face of Wolverine, behind the mask.

John Byrne suggested the name Logan, because of a Canadian mountain.

Chris Claremont helped to develop a lot of the personality Wolverine has become.

Barry Windsor Smith gave us the Weapon X story and explained how Wolverine got his adamantium skeleton and claws.

Under Larry Hama, and whatever editors decided it then, it was revealed the Wolverine had actual bone claws as a part of his skeleton. Also the idea of the false memory implants started.

Jemas, Quasada and Jenkins then gave us the Wolverine origin and his real name.

Wolverine’s main villain Sabertooth, was not created by any of the people involved with Wolverine at the start. Such as Len Wein, Thomas or Romita.

The healing factor power was initially a throw away idea, in no way imagined to become what it has meant to the character. I believe it was a Claremont idea. But can’t nail a specific source. So I leave that possibility open to Wein, Byrne, or Thomas.

By now I think you get the point of this post. Wolverine is a very fragmented creation as a character and who contributed what. However to give Len Wein full creative credit for creating Wolverine, I think is absolutely wrong. His idea and what he contributed to the creation of Wolverine as we know him today is VERY little.

Wein DID NOT design the signature Wolverine costume, make his name / identity of Logan out of the costume. Did not design his signature face out of the costume. Did not make the claws a part of Wolverine’s body. Did not create the bone claws idea. Did not create his revealed Origin and name. Did not create his main villain Sabretooth.

Wein basically saw him as a teenager with gloves that had claws on it.

At one point Wolverine was also seen as a sociopath who could possibly cut down an ally for any minor little perceived slight.

Overall, I’m glad most heroes have only one or two creators who started them, there origin, powers, and main villains.

Using Wolverine as an example, I just find a character created like this to be very messy. And if we were talking financial royalties situation, I think it would be a mess. And in this example, Wein should not and does not deserve much financial royalty on a character like this at all. Because he contributed very little to the status quo of the Wolverine character and what he has become.

And sure I know their was no royalty situation then. But that’s not the point. Overall, as a top selling icon character of Marvel, Wolverine is probably their most patch work created character.

Reading this blog I know it’s true and that the show is done.

Terminato Sarah CANCELLED

I actually enjoyed this show and it was on my DVR list to record. Summer Glau is FANTASTIC!

Sadly it’s canceled, unless another station picks up the show, which in this case is not happening. As the link above shows the various actors are already working on other projects.

I think the move to Friday nights, which is the spot where doomed shows go, was the final straw in sending this show away. And sure enough the move suck the ratings.

Also the lack of advertising really hurt, I didn’t even know the series was returning in February until I looked in the end of January for when it was returning. That’s right, I actually had to look up if and when the series was returning. FOX ads I somehow didn’t see any, probably because they didn’t run many.

I’d like to thanks Lena Headey, Thomas Dekker, Summer Glau and all those involved with making this show happen.

And canceling the show only makes me watch TV even less. Because when shows end, I don’t replace it with something else. It is just one show less to watch.

With Terminator gone, Battlestar Galactica finished and the new Knight Rider apparently done.
IF Heroes on NBC goes, there won’t be left many scripted shows I watch.

It’s a comic blog and this is animation, but since it’s close enough I thought I’d mention this topic.

While I enjoy watching the Family Guy television show, I think creator Seth Macfarlane is putting way too many of his Political Liberal Views on the show, and to be quite honest it’s really annoying. Almost to the point of me saying F’ it all this political spin of his is making me not enjoy the show, and not want to watch it anymore.

I watch shows like this to get a good laugh, not to have views I hold made fun of and ridiculed. While political views he holds are put in front of my face and touted as the right political views to have. And that his view on the situation is the correct one. And that for thinking my political views on certain topics is foolish.

This season especially Family Guy is really laying in the Liberal political views of it’s creator and it’s staff.

I was thinking about an article I read a few months ago by Peter David about Alan Moore. And it was in regard to some writer, forgot who, but basically his book was made into a terrible movie and what the author thought. The writer said, it really didn’t matter because his original work, the book, is unaltered and any variation or adaption of this book does not change the book itself. It’s their for the world to see.

The point was, the original book, the original material is the creators vision and spin off material or adaptions do not effect this. Then a good point Peter David said was if Alan Moore should hit hard financial times in the future, and needs Actor comic funds support, are people going to be running to knock down the doors and help him?

Here is my point: Alan Moore is very stubborn. And it’s funny but I recall reading how Moore while he respects Steve Ditko, really does not think much of Ditko in terms of his political beliefs and Objectivism. And in fact, from what I read, considers it basically foolish.

Yet here is the ironic part, Alan Moore has become as stubborn as Ditko, and close minded about his work as Ditko. And is not willing to compromise his work like Ditko.

In this regard, Alan Moore is leaving vast sums of money on the table. Let’s face it, unless you are rich enough to be financially free. You are going to need money to live a good life.

It’s also not far fetched to believe Alan Moore could make over 1 million dollars in a year just on Watchmen. All he has to say is something like, he will make a Watchmen sequel or prequel series. But wants $100,000 an issue for a 12 issue series. Plus a percent cut of the royalty.

Alan Moore is one of the few powerhouse writers in the industry who can ask for six figures an issue, and he will get it. Especially if it’s Watchmen related.

So right there he has lost a potential $1 million dollars. He could make a followup series again for the same price, say six issue. Then he’s get $1.6 million dollars. And that’s not including royalty fees.

Plus I’m not exactly sure of the Watchmen legal rights, and read something about DC having to keep reprint the series, or the rights revert back to Moore? Well whatever the legal rights case, Moore could decide to give up any and all ownership for a fee. Say $500,000 to one million? Not exactly an unreasonable number.

Now were talking, on the low end example, $2.2 million in potential financial income lost.

Moore also had the chance with the Watchmen movie to compromise and get a cut of free Watchmen movie related money. Yet he is too stubborn to accept it, or to promote the movie.
Worse is the fact that he is bashing the movie.

Alan Moore is not being fair to the artists in his books. Watchmen co-creator Dave Gibbons, the artist in the series for example, loses potential financial income and help, because Moore is outright bashing the movie and spin off material. This effects the artist in the wallet. If Moore does not like spin off material, at least be quiet and let the artist in the series enjoy a financial boost. But to actually bash the spin off material just hurts others involved in the project who are doing their best to create something good.

And in the end were are just talking comic books here. There only about 20-25 pages each. And Alan Moore could write whatever material, in this case further Watchmen material and he will get the price tag he wants for it. But the fact remains Alan Moore is to stubborn to compromise his beliefs, and in the end that is costing him a lot of financial income he could be making.

As for any fears that Alan Moore might have that his original comic book material is compromised, the truth is that it is not. His original Watchmen issues, as well as all the books he has written are untouched and unaltered. All the spin off products and material made, do not effect the original published work. It remains a pristine vision to be read as the author intended.

Moore is one of the few powerhouses in the comic book industry, especially in the current tough economic climate, who could get away with making a million dollars a year in comics.

Even more rare is the fact is that he is a writer, and not an artist. Usually it’s the artists who in the past made over a million dollars a year in the early 90’s, not the writers.

I just think it’s foolish on his part to not take the golden financial opportunities that he is presented. Most people in the comics industry will never get this. This financial door, while still open will not always be there. And if does not act on it while he has the chance, before long Alan Moore may one day find the door closed, because sooner or later it happens to everyone in every industry. When you outstay your welcome, you become yesterdays news and no one is willing to pay you much for yesterdays news.

One last ironic point, is read a few months ago in a book that Alan Moore’s most Steve Ditko iconic character that he made, to basically sum up Ditko and his beliefs was Rorschach. He modeled him after the Question, but also to be the most Ditko type of character that he could create. Yet Rorschach is by far the most popular Watchmen character that fans like. Maybe Ditko’s ideas and beliefs resonate more with fans then Alan Moore thinks.