ask them how they can sleep at night after fucking up the John Carter marketing so much as well
you ask them that and you get me some answers
The marketing was fucked up by Andrew Stanton, the director, not Disney. He had the mistaken impression John Carter rivaled Batman in being an iconic property.
People really need to learn to stop drawing from the nostalgia well. I mean, have any nostalgic characters performed well? Last I can think of was the Addams Family..
People really need to learn to stop drawing from the nostalgia well. I mean, have any nostalgic characters performed well? Last I can think of was the Addams Family..
John Carter's concept may have been old but it had potential IMO. Unfortunately they fucked up with the marketing and had the built-in baggage of not being in the public eye for decades.
0
Quoththe RavenMiami, FL FOR REALRegistered Userregular
That was supposed to appeal to someone's nostalgia? Whose?
He might have also been mistaken on account of the continuing popularity of pulp characters like Conan and Tarzan, disregarding that those characters have had multiple television and film adaptations, while John Carter had none.
People really need to learn to stop drawing from the nostalgia well. I mean, have any nostalgic characters performed well? Last I can think of was the Addams Family..
There are a few others. Alvin & the Chipmunks, Star Trek, and Transformers. I believe the Scooby Doo movies did pretty well too.
Abnett: These are Marvel's characters, and they will develop them as they see fit. Like I said, it's a huge compliment to us that they're doing that, but I think it's only fair to say that we haven't really been consulted in any way, shape or form. We wrote this stuff essentially as work-for-hire, and if Marvel came to us and said, "Would you like to consult on the movie?" that would be lovely. But for now, our interpretation is there on the page.
Lanning: I think that's the way the business works sometimes. Sometimes you do get consulted and it's fantastic, but other times they just do the movies on their own. They're using the comics as a source material, and what they do with that, they're at liberty to do. You have to be professional about that and see the fact that they're using this material as a huge compliment anyway. And if at any point they consult us or we get a ticket to the premier, that's a cherry on the cake as far as we're concerned. Of course, we'd be involved at the drop of a hat. Who wouldn't be? But you've also got to be professional about the whole thing.
They let Millar and Brubaker and Bendis (and Ellis too IIRC) on the other films, it would be only fair to let the guys who really revitalized the brand get some spotlight.
Man, how cool would it be if they got Jim Starlin and DnA at a table to consult on the project?
If only Mark Gruenwald could have lived to see this happen...
People really need to learn to stop drawing from the nostalgia well. I mean, have any nostalgic characters performed well? Last I can think of was the Addams Family..
There are a few others. Alvin & the Chipmunks, Star Trek, and Transformers. I believe the Scooby Doo movies did pretty well too.
Ok, let me re-phrase that. They need to keep from drawing from the DEEP nostalgia well (e.g. pre-60's). The ones you mentioned were all active in the late 80's, so they're relatively recent and still in people's memories.
Abnett: These are Marvel's characters, and they will develop them as they see fit. Like I said, it's a huge compliment to us that they're doing that, but I think it's only fair to say that we haven't really been consulted in any way, shape or form. We wrote this stuff essentially as work-for-hire, and if Marvel came to us and said, "Would you like to consult on the movie?" that would be lovely. But for now, our interpretation is there on the page.
Lanning: I think that's the way the business works sometimes. Sometimes you do get consulted and it's fantastic, but other times they just do the movies on their own. They're using the comics as a source material, and what they do with that, they're at liberty to do. You have to be professional about that and see the fact that they're using this material as a huge compliment anyway. And if at any point they consult us or we get a ticket to the premier, that's a cherry on the cake as far as we're concerned. Of course, we'd be involved at the drop of a hat. Who wouldn't be? But you've also got to be professional about the whole thing.
They let Millar and Brubaker and Bendis (and Ellis too IIRC) on the other films, it would be only fair to let the guys who really revitalized the brand get some spotlight.
The difference is Ellis aside those are all in house guys. Though I question the usefulness of Mark " eh close enough where's my wanted check" Millars use as a consultant.
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
The thing is that they're already trying to get a much younger male audience, 5 to 10 year olds, interested in Marvel with the whole Superhero Squad thing, making kiddie versions of "dark and mature" characters like Wolverine, Venom, Punisher, and Red Skull. I'm pretty sure that their goal is to turn those kids into life long fans of Marvel so that they continue to watch Marvel shows and movies and buy Marvel comic books and games when they grow up to be teenagers and adults.
I just find it strange that they haven't taken that extra step to get younger female audiences involved and turn them into lifelong fans too especially considering how they're already so good at drawing in the female audiences. The fact is that a lot of girls lose interest in the Disney Princesses when they grow older and become teenagers and adults and Disney would no doubt like to find a way to retain those customers. If Disney manages to get girls interested in Marvel, then they could become long term fans like the boys.
If they don't consider this:
to be diluting the brand, then what's big deal with a "Marvel Princesses" thing?
I'm talking about diluting the Princesses brand.
Disney has been pretty judicious about adding new princesses, so I'm guessing that they'd rather develop the ones that they do have rather than expanding the roster.
And if you want female superheroes to attract older kids, then you shouldn't be tying them to a brand that they equate with their younger, more immature years. If they see superheroes as princesses, then when they outgrow princesses they'll outgrow superheroes as well.
Abnett: These are Marvel's characters, and they will develop them as they see fit. Like I said, it's a huge compliment to us that they're doing that, but I think it's only fair to say that we haven't really been consulted in any way, shape or form. We wrote this stuff essentially as work-for-hire, and if Marvel came to us and said, "Would you like to consult on the movie?" that would be lovely. But for now, our interpretation is there on the page.
Lanning: I think that's the way the business works sometimes. Sometimes you do get consulted and it's fantastic, but other times they just do the movies on their own. They're using the comics as a source material, and what they do with that, they're at liberty to do. You have to be professional about that and see the fact that they're using this material as a huge compliment anyway. And if at any point they consult us or we get a ticket to the premier, that's a cherry on the cake as far as we're concerned. Of course, we'd be involved at the drop of a hat. Who wouldn't be? But you've also got to be professional about the whole thing.
They let Millar and Brubaker and Bendis (and Ellis too IIRC) on the other films, it would be only fair to let the guys who really revitalized the brand get some spotlight.
The difference is Ellis aside those are all in house guys. Though I question the usefulness of Mark " eh close enough where's my wanted check" Millars use as a consultant.
True, but I thought DnA were exclusive during their cosmic run, in both writing and inking. Brubaker's done with his exclusive but I would be surprised/shocked if they don't bring him back for consulting on Winter Soldier.
Disney has been pretty judicious about adding new princesses
Have they really? Who are the Princesses that didn't make the cut?
not necessarily princesses, but Mulan is an official Disney Princess and she isn't a princess either by birth or marriage. so, Disney animate female leads that don't get to be Disney Princesses:
Eilonwy from The Black Cauldron (is an actual princess)
Esmeralda from The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Megara from Hercules
Kida from Atlantis: The Lost Empire (is also a princess)
Jane from Tarzan
Any Pixar character (though I could see Merida getting added)
Anyone from a live-action feature, like Giselle from Enchanted or Anne Hathaway's character from The Princess Diaries
All the non-human female characters
Anyone who appeared in a tv show, direct-to-video feature, or video game rather than a feature film.
If they wanted to have twenty or more princesses, they could, but instead they've focused on a smaller and more consistent selection of character because it leads to a more coherent brand identity.
The thing is that they're already trying to get a much younger male audience, 5 to 10 year olds, interested in Marvel with the whole Superhero Squad thing, making kiddie versions of "dark and mature" characters like Wolverine, Venom, Punisher, and Red Skull. I'm pretty sure that their goal is to turn those kids into life long fans of Marvel so that they continue to watch Marvel shows and movies and buy Marvel comic books and games when they grow up to be teenagers and adults.
I just find it strange that they haven't taken that extra step to get younger female audiences involved and turn them into lifelong fans too especially considering how they're already so good at drawing in the female audiences. The fact is that a lot of girls lose interest in the Disney Princesses when they grow older and become teenagers and adults and Disney would no doubt like to find a way to retain those customers. If Disney manages to get girls interested in Marvel, then they could become long term fans like the boys.
If they don't consider this:
to be diluting the brand, then what's big deal with a "Marvel Princesses" thing?
I'm talking about diluting the Princesses brand.
Disney has been pretty judicious about adding new princesses, so I'm guessing that they'd rather develop the ones that they do have rather than expanding the roster.
But they haven't really done anything with those princesses. They haven't made any new animated shows or movies. They're basically just coasting on the popularity of the movies they were in.
Plus they don't have to make Marvel characters into Disney Princesses, they could just make kiddified versions and advertise them to the same audience as the Disney Princesses.
And if you want female superheroes to attract older kids, then you shouldn't be tying them to a brand that they equate with their younger, more immature years. If they see superheroes as princesses, then when they outgrow princesses they'll outgrow superheroes as well.
But both DC and Marvel have done something similar to their characters with things like Tiny Titans and the cute cuddly versions of Wolverine, Punisher, Red Skull, etc. in Superhero Squad. They don't seem to be afraid of young boys outgrowing stuff like that.
Also, the whole "dark and mature" versions of fairy tales genre is pretty successful nowadays with things like "Wicked," "Grimm," "Once Upon a Time," "Snow White," etc.
0
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
oh my god we're talking about so many disney princesses.
What are the odds Nova is in the Guardians movie?
I was in Target, and they had a children's MARVEL coloring book sitting there, front and center, and a notebook in the back to school section, and the cover?
Spidey, Hulk..and NOVA.
Not Wolverine. Not Cap or Iron Man. Nova.
I thought that was odd.
PSN: mxmarks - WiiU: mxmarks - twitter: @ MikesPS4 - twitch.tv/mxmarks - "Yes, mxmarks is the King of Queens" - Unbreakable Vow
0
AntimatterDevo Was RightGates of SteelRegistered Userregular
Nova's in the new Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon. he even has a lego minifig now.
Abnett: These are Marvel's characters, and they will develop them as they see fit. Like I said, it's a huge compliment to us that they're doing that, but I think it's only fair to say that we haven't really been consulted in any way, shape or form. We wrote this stuff essentially as work-for-hire, and if Marvel came to us and said, "Would you like to consult on the movie?" that would be lovely. But for now, our interpretation is there on the page.
Lanning: I think that's the way the business works sometimes. Sometimes you do get consulted and it's fantastic, but other times they just do the movies on their own. They're using the comics as a source material, and what they do with that, they're at liberty to do. You have to be professional about that and see the fact that they're using this material as a huge compliment anyway. And if at any point they consult us or we get a ticket to the premier, that's a cherry on the cake as far as we're concerned. Of course, we'd be involved at the drop of a hat. Who wouldn't be? But you've also got to be professional about the whole thing.
They let Millar and Brubaker and Bendis (and Ellis too IIRC) on the other films, it would be only fair to let the guys who really revitalized the brand get some spotlight.
The difference is Ellis aside those are all in house guys. Though I question the usefulness of Mark " eh close enough where's my wanted check" Millars use as a consultant.
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Millar was the main reason for them having Iron Monger as the villain in Iron Man and not Mandaran.
Nova and Quill have pretty similar origins so it'd be iodd to have them both in there.
I figure if GotG pans out how marvel expects Nova will be a phase three film. Especially if they are serious about not churning out to many sequels
Nova won't be in the GOTG. Not at this point, anyway. They released the official roster a few weeks ago IIRC. It was Star Lord, Drax, Gamora, Rocket Raccoon & Groot.
I wonder why they opted not to stick Runaways on the docket given that there's a script already that is apparently liked
Avengers 1 and 2 become the priority, I imagine. They've got a limit on how many movies they can make a year (and budget) so they don't have much room to add new things. maybe they'll get more breathing room once they get the go ahead to have 3 slots a year.
Abnett: These are Marvel's characters, and they will develop them as they see fit. Like I said, it's a huge compliment to us that they're doing that, but I think it's only fair to say that we haven't really been consulted in any way, shape or form. We wrote this stuff essentially as work-for-hire, and if Marvel came to us and said, "Would you like to consult on the movie?" that would be lovely. But for now, our interpretation is there on the page.
Lanning: I think that's the way the business works sometimes. Sometimes you do get consulted and it's fantastic, but other times they just do the movies on their own. They're using the comics as a source material, and what they do with that, they're at liberty to do. You have to be professional about that and see the fact that they're using this material as a huge compliment anyway. And if at any point they consult us or we get a ticket to the premier, that's a cherry on the cake as far as we're concerned. Of course, we'd be involved at the drop of a hat. Who wouldn't be? But you've also got to be professional about the whole thing.
They let Millar and Brubaker and Bendis (and Ellis too IIRC) on the other films, it would be only fair to let the guys who really revitalized the brand get some spotlight.
The difference is Ellis aside those are all in house guys. Though I question the usefulness of Mark " eh close enough where's my wanted check" Millars use as a consultant.
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Millar was the main reason for them having Iron Monger as the villain in Iron Man and not Mandaran.
Bendis was involved in that, as well.
0
Quoththe RavenMiami, FL FOR REALRegistered Userregular
I guess I can also dig that people might burn out on superheroes so they may not want to overload things
It's a hot genre now but it could flip in a minute
Abnett: These are Marvel's characters, and they will develop them as they see fit. Like I said, it's a huge compliment to us that they're doing that, but I think it's only fair to say that we haven't really been consulted in any way, shape or form. We wrote this stuff essentially as work-for-hire, and if Marvel came to us and said, "Would you like to consult on the movie?" that would be lovely. But for now, our interpretation is there on the page.
Lanning: I think that's the way the business works sometimes. Sometimes you do get consulted and it's fantastic, but other times they just do the movies on their own. They're using the comics as a source material, and what they do with that, they're at liberty to do. You have to be professional about that and see the fact that they're using this material as a huge compliment anyway. And if at any point they consult us or we get a ticket to the premier, that's a cherry on the cake as far as we're concerned. Of course, we'd be involved at the drop of a hat. Who wouldn't be? But you've also got to be professional about the whole thing.
They let Millar and Brubaker and Bendis (and Ellis too IIRC) on the other films, it would be only fair to let the guys who really revitalized the brand get some spotlight.
The difference is Ellis aside those are all in house guys. Though I question the usefulness of Mark " eh close enough where's my wanted check" Millars use as a consultant.
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Millar was the main reason for them having Iron Monger as the villain in Iron Man and not Mandaran.
Bendis was involved in that, as well.
Proof that Millar needs people to work with or he's worthless.
Like I get wanted isn't ever going to get an accurate film adaptation and all things considered it shouldn't but the way he gushed about it. Ugh. Have some fucking pride in your work dude.
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
Abnett: These are Marvel's characters, and they will develop them as they see fit. Like I said, it's a huge compliment to us that they're doing that, but I think it's only fair to say that we haven't really been consulted in any way, shape or form. We wrote this stuff essentially as work-for-hire, and if Marvel came to us and said, "Would you like to consult on the movie?" that would be lovely. But for now, our interpretation is there on the page.
Lanning: I think that's the way the business works sometimes. Sometimes you do get consulted and it's fantastic, but other times they just do the movies on their own. They're using the comics as a source material, and what they do with that, they're at liberty to do. You have to be professional about that and see the fact that they're using this material as a huge compliment anyway. And if at any point they consult us or we get a ticket to the premier, that's a cherry on the cake as far as we're concerned. Of course, we'd be involved at the drop of a hat. Who wouldn't be? But you've also got to be professional about the whole thing.
They let Millar and Brubaker and Bendis (and Ellis too IIRC) on the other films, it would be only fair to let the guys who really revitalized the brand get some spotlight.
The difference is Ellis aside those are all in house guys. Though I question the usefulness of Mark " eh close enough where's my wanted check" Millars use as a consultant.
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Millar was the main reason for them having Iron Monger as the villain in Iron Man and not Mandaran.
Bendis was involved in that, as well.
Proof that Millar needs people to work with or he's worthless.
Like I get wanted isn't ever going to get an accurate film adaptation and all things considered it shouldn't but the way he gushed about it. Ugh. Have some fucking pride in your work dude.
Pride wasn't what he was after with the Wanted movie. He wanted a foot in the door to a Hollywood career.
0
Quoththe RavenMiami, FL FOR REALRegistered Userregular
Speaking of licensed material, I was too excited to find a set of Super Hero Squad board books
Nova won't be in the GOTG. Not at this point, anyway. They released the official roster a few weeks ago IIRC. It was Star Lord, Drax, Gamora, Rocket Raccoon & Groot.
Are you talking about the Comic Con concept art? Because that's all that was - preproduction concept art that was created for the product pitch. There isn't even a complete script for Guardians of the Galaxy yet, so the roster is far from locked down. And even if Nova wasn't a team member, there is no reason to say the Nova Corps couldn't be part of the movie, or even fill the SHIELD in Space role.
Posts
you ask them that and you get me some answers
I appreciate that
The marketing was fucked up by Andrew Stanton, the director, not Disney. He had the mistaken impression John Carter rivaled Batman in being an iconic property.
Diablo 3 - ArtfulDodger#1572
Minecraft - ArtfulDodger42
John Carter's concept may have been old but it had potential IMO. Unfortunately they fucked up with the marketing and had the built-in baggage of not being in the public eye for decades.
There are a few others. Alvin & the Chipmunks, Star Trek, and Transformers. I believe the Scooby Doo movies did pretty well too.
Man, how cool would it be if they got Jim Starlin and DnA at a table to consult on the project?
If only Mark Gruenwald could have lived to see this happen...
That does not exactly strike me as a mass market
I mean, I read them, but my peers were reading other crap or nothing at all
Ok, let me re-phrase that. They need to keep from drawing from the DEEP nostalgia well (e.g. pre-60's). The ones you mentioned were all active in the late 80's, so they're relatively recent and still in people's memories.
Diablo 3 - ArtfulDodger#1572
Minecraft - ArtfulDodger42
The difference is Ellis aside those are all in house guys. Though I question the usefulness of Mark " eh close enough where's my wanted check" Millars use as a consultant.
I'm talking about diluting the Princesses brand.
Disney has been pretty judicious about adding new princesses, so I'm guessing that they'd rather develop the ones that they do have rather than expanding the roster.
And if you want female superheroes to attract older kids, then you shouldn't be tying them to a brand that they equate with their younger, more immature years. If they see superheroes as princesses, then when they outgrow princesses they'll outgrow superheroes as well.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Have they really? Who are the Princesses that didn't make the cut?
the chick from the rescuers
mrs. potts
True, but I thought DnA were exclusive during their cosmic run, in both writing and inking. Brubaker's done with his exclusive but I would be surprised/shocked if they don't bring him back for consulting on Winter Soldier.
not necessarily princesses, but Mulan is an official Disney Princess and she isn't a princess either by birth or marriage. so, Disney animate female leads that don't get to be Disney Princesses:
Eilonwy from The Black Cauldron (is an actual princess)
Esmeralda from The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Megara from Hercules
Kida from Atlantis: The Lost Empire (is also a princess)
Jane from Tarzan
Alice from Alice in Wonderland
Tinkerbelle and Wendy
Sally from The Nightmare Before Christmas
Lilo
Jane from Tarzan
Any Pixar character (though I could see Merida getting added)
Anyone from a live-action feature, like Giselle from Enchanted or Anne Hathaway's character from The Princess Diaries
All the non-human female characters
Anyone who appeared in a tv show, direct-to-video feature, or video game rather than a feature film.
If they wanted to have twenty or more princesses, they could, but instead they've focused on a smaller and more consistent selection of character because it leads to a more coherent brand identity.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
But they haven't really done anything with those princesses. They haven't made any new animated shows or movies. They're basically just coasting on the popularity of the movies they were in.
Plus they don't have to make Marvel characters into Disney Princesses, they could just make kiddified versions and advertise them to the same audience as the Disney Princesses.
But both DC and Marvel have done something similar to their characters with things like Tiny Titans and the cute cuddly versions of Wolverine, Punisher, Red Skull, etc. in Superhero Squad. They don't seem to be afraid of young boys outgrowing stuff like that.
Also, the whole "dark and mature" versions of fairy tales genre is pretty successful nowadays with things like "Wicked," "Grimm," "Once Upon a Time," "Snow White," etc.
turns out hound's going to be DLC, he isn't in the game yet
sorry
What are the odds Nova is in the Guardians movie?
I was in Target, and they had a children's MARVEL coloring book sitting there, front and center, and a notebook in the back to school section, and the cover?
Spidey, Hulk..and NOVA.
Not Wolverine. Not Cap or Iron Man. Nova.
I thought that was odd.
So, me then
I went to see it so I guess that worked
maybe it should be though
introduce children to the joys of a world where a big manly man runs around with a super hot naked princess
I figure if GotG pans out how marvel expects Nova will be a phase three film. Especially if they are serious about not churning out to many sequels
Burn it all to the ground. This is like an X-Men game without Wolverine.
Eh who am I kidding, I'll still give it a shot, the demo seemed good enough. There's always Grimlock.
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Millar was the main reason for them having Iron Monger as the villain in Iron Man and not Mandaran.
Nova won't be in the GOTG. Not at this point, anyway. They released the official roster a few weeks ago IIRC. It was Star Lord, Drax, Gamora, Rocket Raccoon & Groot.
Avengers 1 and 2 become the priority, I imagine. They've got a limit on how many movies they can make a year (and budget) so they don't have much room to add new things. maybe they'll get more breathing room once they get the go ahead to have 3 slots a year.
Bendis was involved in that, as well.
It's a hot genre now but it could flip in a minute
True. That said, Marvel doesn't have to be limited to super-heroes with their movies. They can do licensed genre material.
Proof that Millar needs people to work with or he's worthless.
Like I get wanted isn't ever going to get an accurate film adaptation and all things considered it shouldn't but the way he gushed about it. Ugh. Have some fucking pride in your work dude.
Pride wasn't what he was after with the Wanted movie. He wanted a foot in the door to a Hollywood career.
You know, the cardboard kind for little kids
Gotta get em early
Are you talking about the Comic Con concept art? Because that's all that was - preproduction concept art that was created for the product pitch. There isn't even a complete script for Guardians of the Galaxy yet, so the roster is far from locked down. And even if Nova wasn't a team member, there is no reason to say the Nova Corps couldn't be part of the movie, or even fill the SHIELD in Space role.