Topic: Funnybooks (Read 161497 times)

Thad · « **Reply #1740 on:** February 16, 2012, 07:13:01 AM »

Quote from: Mongrel on February 15, 2012, 10:20:23 PM

Is that the same ongoing Dark Horse Conan series or something new?

Kinda both. It's a new #1 with a new team adapting a different story, but it's still Dark Horse and it's still in-continuity with all the rest of their Conan books. There's at least one more mini being published concurrently by a different team, but this is the main book, the Conan the Barbarian title.

Quote from: Büge on February 16, 2012, 05:04:00 AM

It looks like the VP of sales is coming out of the dugout, folks!

Seems mainly to be arguing selection bias, which is fair enough. But I have a hard time believing the "real" numbers, whatever they may be, are much better.

Thad · « **Reply #1741 on:** February 16, 2012, 07:28:13 AM »

Marvel honchos on the Friedrich suit:

Quote

[Quesada:] First and foremost, Marvel has not settled with Gary. What has been misinterpreted as a settlement is a court document that Gary's very own attorneys agreed to, along with Marvel's attorneys. That document basically ends his lawsuit against Marvel at the trial court level with Marvel having won and Gary's case dismissed. By agreeing on a number for the profits Gary made from selling unlicensed Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider merchandise after the court has decided that Marvel is the owner of that copyright, it allows Gary's attorneys to file his appeal now rather than have Gary litigate further. It is in no way a "fine" or "punishment" for Gary. It is something that the court asked both parties to do and agree upon. This is one more step in an expensive and time-consuming legal process initiated way back in 2007.

Buckley: We should also clarify another rumor that Marvel is somehow preventing Gary from promoting his creative association with Ghost Rider. This is simply not true. The court document Joe mentioned specifically gives Gary the right to sign authorized Ghost Rider books and merchandise and sell his autograph.

[...]

Quesada: From the Marvel side of things, we absolutely agree that Gary made a significant contribution to the creation of Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider. That has never been under contention. But Gary didn't do it alone. Mike Ploog, the original artist, was a co-creator. Other people contributed as well, including Roy Thomas and Stan Lee.

Grain of salt (and I just LOVE how they managed to wedge Stan Lee claiming credit for something in there), but if this DOES end in a result less than "Friedrich has to pay $17K and stop saying he created Ghost Rider" then I'm all for that.

Mongrel · « **Reply #1742 on:** February 16, 2012, 08:23:13 AM »

Quote from: Thad on February 16, 2012, 07:13:01 AM

Quote from: Mongrel on February 15, 2012, 10:20:23 PM
Is that the same ongoing Dark Horse Conan series or something new?

Kinda both. It's a new #1 with a new team adapting a different story, but it's still Dark Horse and it's still in-continuity with all the rest of their Conan books. There's at least one more mini being published concurrently by a different team, but this is the main book, the Conan the Barbarian title.

Yeah, that was the pattern while I was reading it too: The main series gets reset to #1 after every 50 issues or so, with each 50 issues representing an old Conan book. There were also concurrent but unrelated miniseries of 1-5 issues written by other artists and writers (some were good enough to pick up, others kind of stunk a bit).

Thad · « **Reply #1743 on:** February 16, 2012, 08:25:19 AM »

Ah, okay. I read maybe the first half-dozen Busiek/Nord issues but didn't keep up after that.

Mongrel · « **Reply #1744 on:** February 16, 2012, 08:25:30 AM »

Quote from: Thad on February 16, 2012, 07:28:13 AM

Marvel honchos on the Friedrich suit:

Quote
[Quesada:] First and foremost, Marvel has not settled with Gary. What has been misinterpreted as a settlement is a court document that Gary's very own attorneys agreed to, along with Marvel's attorneys. That document basically ends his lawsuit against Marvel at the trial court level with Marvel having won and Gary's case dismissed. By agreeing on a number for the profits Gary made from selling unlicensed Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider merchandise after the court has decided that Marvel is the owner of that copyright, it allows Gary's attorneys to file his appeal now rather than have Gary litigate further. It is in no way a "fine" or "punishment" for Gary. It is something that the court asked both parties to do and agree upon. This is one more step in an expensive and time-consuming legal process initiated way back in 2007.

Buckley: We should also clarify another rumor that Marvel is somehow preventing Gary from promoting his creative association with Ghost Rider. This is simply not true. The court document Joe mentioned specifically gives Gary the right to sign authorized Ghost Rider books and merchandise and sell his autograph.

[...]

Quesada: From the Marvel side of things, we absolutely agree that Gary made a significant contribution to the creation of Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider. That has never been under contention. But Gary didn't do it alone. Mike Ploog, the original artist, was a co-creator. Other people contributed as well, including Roy Thomas and Stan Lee.

Grain of salt (and I just LOVE how they managed to wedge Stan Lee claiming credit for something in there), but if this DOES end in a result less than "Friedrich has to pay $17K and stop saying he created Ghost Rider" then I'm all for that.

Wow, Mike Ploog was the original artist? Ha!

Büge · « **Reply #1745 on:** February 16, 2012, 08:43:49 AM »

Why does that name sound so familiar?

Oh, right.

Mongrel · « **Reply #1746 on:** February 16, 2012, 08:49:01 AM »

Quote from: Thad on February 16, 2012, 08:25:19 AM

Ah, okay. I read maybe the first half-dozen Busiek/Nord issues but didn't keep up after that.

Yeah, the first run was titled just "Conan", and the second was "Conan The Cimmerian". Looking it up, I stopped buying after the Kozaki story arc was completed in Cimmerian #21 (so, effectively #71 of the overall series).

It got to be a really good book. Worth looking at anyway.

Quote from: Büge on February 16, 2012, 08:43:49 AM

Why does that name sound so familiar?

Oh, right.

Also, he did all the art in the static "storyboard-esque" scenes in Ralph Bakshi's Wizards.

Thad · « **Reply #1747 on:** February 16, 2012, 09:06:20 AM »

Yeah, I've always dug Busiek and it was neat seeing him do something besides superheroes.

Sounds like he's still at the table, too; he showed up in the comments thread on a recent Robot 6 post about the current book. (Ironically, the post was based on an interview where Brian Wood said, among other things, pros shouldn't show up in fan forums.)

Büge · « **Reply #1748 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:24:38 PM »

Twenty-One Not Exactly Original Notes On More Watchmen

Quote

17. I'm also not certain how you can see this as anything but a step away from the wider cultural message of Watchmen back in the 1980s: that authors matter, that original work can be rewarded on the same level as reworking someone else's ideas, that comics have literary and culture value for their ideas and expressive force above and beyond their value as entertainment product. I might call DC foolish if they were touting these sequel books as a match for Watchmen's artistic achievement, but that this idea isn't even on the table may be scarier. This is a toy line. This is a happy meal. This is "based on." This is product.

Zaratustra · « **Reply #1749 on:** February 16, 2012, 06:54:20 PM »

But you see, DC needs Watchmen. Like, really needs it. It's consistently their top selling item since Neil Gaiman went to Hollywood.

MEANWHILE AT MARVEL!

Mongrel · « **Reply #1750 on:** February 16, 2012, 07:01:47 PM »

That image of Mal deciding not to say anything.

Thad · « **Reply #1751 on:** February 16, 2012, 08:36:55 PM »

...oh. Well that explains the cover.

And here I was thinking it was just a sequel to Heroes for Hire #13.

(Both covers possibly NSFW despite having Marvel's equivalent of a PG-13 rating)

Mongrel · « **Reply #1752 on:** February 16, 2012, 11:29:18 PM »

So... two Marvel tentacle-rape covers in one month?

Er... ahem

*shuffles papers*

ahem hum

*straightens tie*

And that's it for tonight folks!

Classic · « **Reply #1753 on:** February 16, 2012, 11:41:31 PM »

Don't be foolish!

Quote from: Thad on February 16, 2012, 08:36:55 PM

...oh. Well that explains the cover.

This one's just a pregnant, vaguely lizard/insect gangbang/rape scene.

Quote from: Thad on February 16, 2012, 08:36:55 PM

And here I was thinking it was just a sequel to Heroes for Hire #13.

This one's got tentacles, but it's a bdsm voyeur group thing that might theoretically be consensual. Though one of the lead characters is, at best, having second thoughts.

patito · « **Reply #1754 on:** February 17, 2012, 12:31:09 AM »

The heroes for hire cover is also from years ago. Stay classy marvel.

Büge · « **Reply #1755 on:** February 19, 2012, 04:21:20 PM »

Apparently, Kevin Smith's new AMC series about comic book stores just perpetuates the worst comic book nerd stereotypes.

And Bryan Johnson takes issue with that review.

Thad · « **Reply #1756 on:** February 20, 2012, 07:05:05 AM »

Yeah, I'm curious how much of that is "Hey guys free publicity let's argue with Chris Sims some more!" and how much is that Kevin Smith and his buddies have legitimately thin skin and can't let Chris Sims criticize them without retorting.

I haven't actually seen the show, but it occurs to me that Clerks would probably not have been a very good movie if it had been about the store owner, the manager, and their buddies.

Mongrel · « **Reply #1757 on:** February 20, 2012, 03:09:49 PM »

Latest drama at Archie comics

I posted this here rather than the Archie thread for two reasons: 1) I just want to point out how cool it is that Mark Evanier has reached a point where he's being used as an industry expert by mainstream news media, and 2) any possible relevance to the Archie vs. Penders suit conversation.

Ted Belmont · « **Reply #1758 on:** February 20, 2012, 05:37:32 PM »

Quote from: Thad on February 20, 2012, 07:05:05 AM

Yeah, I'm curious how much of that is "Hey guys free publicity let's argue with Chris Sims some more!" and how much is that Kevin Smith and his buddies have legitimately thin skin and can't let Chris Sims criticize them without retorting.

They responded in a similar manner to another review, although that response was so passive-aggressive that they didn't even respond directly TO the person writing the review, so I'm gonna go with the latter.

Thad · « **Reply #1759 on:** February 20, 2012, 07:42:50 PM »

Quote from: Mongrel on February 20, 2012, 03:09:49 PM

1) I just want to point out how cool it is that Mark Evanier has reached a point where he's being used as an industry expert by mainstream news media

He's actually their go-to guy on lots of shit. He says his phone starts ringing every time somebody in the comics industry dies.

Quote from: Mongrel on February 20, 2012, 03:09:49 PM

2) any possible relevance to the Archie vs. Penders suit conversation.

Penders has mentioned it obliquely. He hasn't gone into detail but he thinks they're smearing Silberkleit because they want her out, and that she's innocent. Bob Repas goes into a bit more detail on the next page.

BC had an article on it last week; standard "BC is a gossip rag" disclaimer applies but I think it's pretty measured (and makes the point that even if everything they say about Silberkleit is actually true, it's nothing compared to the whispers about previous execs -- meaning that Archie has hushed up worse in the past and is very pointedly not hushing this up).

News:

Author Topic: Funnybooks (Read 161497 times)