Originally Posted by merced
I don't see them as stupid - I just see them as regular folk who got scr**ed by the system.
When Trump built his NJ casino plenty of regular folks, retirees on fixed incomes, lost their homes to eminent domain to allow his project to go forward. So much for private property.
It's sort of the same here.
WB/DC is as bad as Toberoff IMO. They have failed to exploit the franchise for decades now. Superman books are outsold by a host of other DC titles. Titles that get the artists and writers Superman doesn't. The heirs were not happy with that situation.
Or how Superman was in development hell as a film for 16 years prior to SR. In the interim Batman had flopped and DC/WB had swooped in and spent the money to fix the franchise and voila - it's a billion dollar film franchise now.
I mostly have sympathy for the heirs.
I'm not fooled by MOS. WB had to do it or pay the heirs 6 million or so. That is what the heirs got for SR. I believe that figure is quoted in one of Trexler's articles. BTW, their half of the profits being 6 million tells you SR made hardly any profit - though I'm sure there was some cooking of the books by TPTB.
In any case no film would have meant WB would have to pay the heirs another 6 million or so out of their bottom line.
With the film they have a chance of making a small profit net of the fees they will pay the heirs. So WB isn't doing this out of the kindness.... so to speak. IMO.
In fact I think MOS will do a bit better than SR so WB will get a few extra million to play with than it did from SR after paying out the film's and the heirs costs.
That they won't be able to make a sequel doesn't really make a difference to WB. WB should still be net ahead with MOS. It helps them in the PR department with the fans too as the legal battle moves forward over the next years.
All of this is true. DC and later on, DC/WB has had the opportunity to make the Siegel and Shuster familes-and Jerry and Joe when they were alive-the deal that they deserved, which is a deal as good as Bob Kane's, the deal his heirs now enjoy. Kane was a rich man in the 60's, and he got rich by being smart and manipulative. He basically got wealthy off of Bill Finger's brilliance. Meanwhile, Siegel and Shuster did a lot more work on Superman than Kane ever did on Batman, but because they were not skilled crooks like Kane was, they lived lives of poverty and were never wealthy. DC didn't even want to give them credit for creating Superman or the pittance of a pension they finally gave Jerry and Joe (and their heirs after their deaths). The only reason they did is because all the nations top cartoonists from Charles Schultz to Jack Kirby pressured them to and Neal Adams and Jerry Robinson negotiated them a deal. Who is really suffering from this is the fans, especially if we end up with Superman dressed in a go-go dancer belt and his origins screwed up or Clark gone or wearing armor or whatever crap they might have to do.
Originally Posted by solidsnake86
Now your just making stuff up. They have failed to exploit the franchise, really?
So they've been content with losing money on the character all these years. Unless theres something wrong with me I remember there being a lois and clark television series, superman the animated series, smallville on tv for 10 seasons, Superman returns and him still being printed in the comics including the New Krypton crossover which was supposed to be his big event and most of all having Jim on the title for 12 issues, grant morisson on all-star, jms on earth one and releasing a hardcover edition. If thats not exploiting the character I don't know what is
You're choosing to ignore things because you don't like the way its turned out. No one can flip a switch and make things successful because every company would be doing it. Batman wasn't a billion dollar franchise before the dark knight which was frankly a fluke do to a host of things. If WB is failing at using superman they must be really dropping the ball with the rest of their characters not named superman and batman.
DC long ago decided they would be further challenged over Superman's rights and decided to make the rights-and-costs controlled Batman their centerpiece character. In fact, DC argued during the court case that Superman has lost popularity and therefore value, and that they should have to pay less as a result. Of course Superman lost value-DC tanked him on purpose by making him a Marvel-lite character and Batman's *****.
Originally Posted by merced
Superman books sell poorly (under 30K/month) because the qualty is poor and has been forever.
Not talking the occasional special, I'm talking the regular books. Heck Superman was missing from one of his titles for a year - Lex basically taking it over. That is what I'm talking about. The quality has not been there for a long time which explains the poor sales figures.
Great sales and good quality like there is with the GL books (he's getting 5 books in the reboot, Superman is reduced to 2) doesn't guarantee a film's sucess as we've just seen. Lots of other factors were going on with that film that hurt it IMO.
Building a foundation of quality work, hopefully Timm's GL will be a hit, is in the long run going to bolster and strengthen a character.
Yeah, this new revamp will the 5th new origin for Superman since 2000. There is no stability in creative teams or direction. Superman is in Wonder Woman territory at this point-he only has a comic because of his name. As soon as they got some momentum going, they wreck it. And how Elliot S! Maggin or Mark Waid is not the Superman editor is beyond me.