|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 13, 2018 12:49:43 GMT -5
I'm sure I've floated this idea before, but doing it in the form of a letter:
Dear DC Comics, You've had endless reboots and changes to Superman in the comics in order to 'adapt to an always changing marketplace. You've also had different audiences formed from Superman in television and have made arrangements to continue those adventures in the comics to supplement your current plans for Superman.... the prime example is the "Smallville" title that seems to have been a big success.
So, here is an idea I'd like to pitch to you:
Why not have a separate line of comics that adapts and continues from Richard Donner's version of Superman?
DC may or may not have already paid for the rights to use Brando's likeness for the Superman Returns adaptation.... and there are countless fans who feel that Chris Reeve's interpretation as the definitive one--- couldn't an arrangement also be made with the Reeve estate?
In any case, with comics struggling in the marketplace, there is a large segment of the population that grew up with the Donner and Reeve version of Superman- why not explore the idea of doing an adaptation of the original Donner films (though I'm totally fine with removing the time reversal aspect) and continuing it forward as a separate standalone Superman comic book series, with consulting Mr. Donner (who is bffs with Geoff Johns anyhow) for his ideas and approval of designs in continuing this series, as it adapts other elements (Brainiac, Supergirl, etc.) that are readily available and might have been what Donner would have used, had he continued as director of the classic Superman films?
Regards, crazy asian man
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 13, 2018 13:13:13 GMT -5
Lol. Co-sign.
I’d be up for a Donnerverse comic. If they made an Adam West Batman comic, CW Supergirl comic, and smallville comic I don’t see why if they can do it they don’t do it. They can’t really use the excuse of it’s not based on a current series because two of the comics I mentioned were based on shows that were over.
Best reason I can think of that it’s not happening is they don’t think it would sell as well plus they’d have to pay too much for Reeve’s likeness and other likenesses or they aren’t being allowed to use Reeves likeness. I think there’s still a good chance they’ll at least consider it one day. BThere are a lot of good stories they can tell.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 14, 2018 1:18:00 GMT -5
Lol. Co-sign. I’d be up for a Donnerverse comic. If they made an Adam West Batman comic, CW Supergirl comic, and smallville comic I don’t see why if they can do it they don’t do it. They can’t really use the excuse of it’s not based on a current series because two of the comics I mentioned were based on shows that were over. Best reason I can think of that it’s not happening is they don’t think it would sell as well plus they’d have to pay too much for Reeve’s likeness and other likenesses or they aren’t being allowed to use Reeves likeness. I think there’s still a good chance they’ll at least consider it one day. BThere are a lot of good stories they can tell. I think you nailed it perfectly. The argument for the Reeve estate to let DC do it would be that it helps continue Reeve's memory and keeps it out there in some form. Maybe they are negotiating, but it'd be nice to know if there's even the intent to make it happen, happening....
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 14, 2018 11:47:37 GMT -5
As much as Reeve's name, work, and memory have been invoked in the last year for the 40th, the 80th, and in the wake of changes after the failure of New 52 and the DCEU I'm sure they'll continue to negotiate. I think the estate and his family are just wary of too much being out there, subpar products with his likeness with their endorsement, and not being paid what they feel the rights are worth. Reeve is still known and popular so they have some leverage. Each side knows there's a demand out there.
They have to have that likeness though. There's no point otherwise. It's a tough spot. I think it's a similar combination of reasons with different levels that's keeping George Reeves Superman products on ice. Who knows the status of his estate and which of his heirs would or should benefit? All that would have to be worked out first. Whoever legally benefits stands to make some money. I've wondered if the same issues have affected Batman 66 products. I'm not sure they have the likeness rights for Neil Hamilton or and I’m not sure they had Alan Napier’s at first.
We also don't see much Jack Nicholson Joker product because he charges so much.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 15, 2018 0:05:10 GMT -5
As much as Reeve's name, work, and memory have been invoked in the last year for the 40th, the 80th, and in the wake of changes after the failure of New 52 and the DCEU I'm sure they'll continue to negotiate. I think the estate and his family are just wary of too much being out there, subpar products with his likeness with their endorsement, and not being paid what they feel the rights are worth. Reeve is still known and popular so they have some leverage. Each side knows there's a demand out there. They have to have that likeness though. There's no point otherwise. It's a tough spot. I think it's a similar combination of reasons with different levels that's keeping George Reeves Superman products on ice. Who knows the status of his estate and which of his heirs would or should benefit? All that would have to be worked out first. Whoever legally benefits stands to make some money. I've wondered if the same issues have affected Batman 66 products. I'm not sure they have the likeness rights for Neil Hamilton or and I’m not sure they had Alan Napier’s at first. We also don't see much Jack Nicholson Joker product because he charges so much. I did find it interesting to see an old one-person show by Carrie Fisher on HBO where Fisher shared that Lucas owned her likeness (presumably from the first Star Wars contract). It would be nice to know if this is/or has been discussed behind the scenes at all. I do know that I'm bummed that John Byrne was THIS close to adapting Superman II in comics to help promote Superman Returns before it came out--- and Byrne's Superman certainly looks inspired enough by Reeve's look that I'd be fine if that likeness was used,,, but I can't imagine any of the actors asking for an arm and a leg for a comic series, given how sales aren't all that great for comics nowadays. I wonder how long DC expected Batman 66 to last and if it was overall considered a giant success with whatever costs they had to pay.... in any case, I still think even now a well-done adaptation of STM/SII would be money in the bank.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,075
|
Post by Metallo on Aug 15, 2018 11:07:21 GMT -5
I don’t think Batman 66 was a giant success but it did decent enough business that even though they ended the ongoing they’ve done more limited series. I’m sure they knew the market for something like that would be more limited for various reasons.
When it came to some of the SR comics it was odd to me to see some of the art styles and how they tried to find some visual middle ground between the Reeve films and SR. I’d rather they went one way with it and the vague history.
I always assumed Lucas owned her likeness just for Star Wars products. Bad enough that it seems like he had it in perpetuity but it didn’t extend beyond that did it? If Fisher had done something else that was merchandised they could have used her likeness on it too right? Fords got his face on plenty of stuff.
Lucas was brilliant with his handling of that and the merchandising rights but it was a bad deal for the actors. They didn’t have to sign away but they probably didn’t have much choice after signing on to do the films. You certainly don’t see actors doing that now so I’m guessing they learned from what happened with Star Wars.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Aug 19, 2018 18:32:23 GMT -5
I don’t think Batman 66 was a giant success but it did decent enough business that even though they ended the ongoing they’ve done more limited series. I’m sure they knew the market for something like that would be more limited for various reasons. When it came to some of the SR comics it was odd to me to see some of the art styles and how they tried to find some visual middle ground between the Reeve films and SR. I’d rather they went one way with it and the vague history. I always assumed Lucas owned her likeness just for Star Wars products. Bad enough that it seems like he had it in perpetuity but it didn’t extend beyond that did it? If Fisher had done something else that was merchandised they could have used her likeness on it too right? Fords got his face on plenty of stuff. Lucas was brilliant with his handling of that and the merchandising rights but it was a bad deal for the actors. They didn’t have to sign away but they probably didn’t have much choice after signing on to do the films. You certainly don’t see actors doing that now so I’m guessing they learned from what happened with Star Wars. If Lucasfilm has rights to likeness to both Hamill and Fisher, I wonder if that's true for Ford, too--in terms of perpetual rights - Ford I'd read years ago got a mint in renegotiating for Empire, as it wasn't certain way back when that Solo would be in the sequels--- so one assumes (1) the likenesses might not have been part of the first deal, and (2) if he was able to make a second deal- did he get an even bigger chunk of change for 'forever likeness' rights with that second deal?
|
|