|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 11, 2018 10:26:51 GMT -5
The theory proceeds the execution. Not everyone did what Mcfarlane did. As I pointed out before, many guest creators had their ownership listed in the indicia. I don't think anyone got ripped off by Larsen, Lee etc. I'm not talking about work for hire. I'm talking about claiming to be a champion of the creator and then stifling that creator's ability to publish their own works with your company whenever it's inconvenient for you. Image wasn't robbing these guys, but it wasn't giving them the platform it promised either, all while claiming they were championing these creators' cause. And that really sucks if you're a hot artist who left a well-paying gig for image, and now you can't even get your book published regularly. What I'm saying is that those practices are no longer in effect. It was them going through their growing pains. I haven't heard any horror stories since the early days.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 11, 2018 10:27:58 GMT -5
At the beginning Malibu paid the way but that money didn't last forever. Right, but there was no risk involved. They went solo only after the cash was flowing in quite nicely.So your point that the image founders took the financial risk is not accurate. There was risk. If the company folded after 2 years, they all risked being blackballed by the other companies. They did it to Shooter.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,692
|
Post by shaxper on Feb 11, 2018 10:28:15 GMT -5
I'm not talking about work for hire. I'm talking about claiming to be a champion of the creator and then stifling that creator's ability to publish their own works with your company whenever it's inconvenient for you. Image wasn't robbing these guys, but it wasn't giving them the platform it promised either, all while claiming they were championing these creators' cause. And that really sucks if you're a hot artist who left a well-paying gig for image, and now you can't even get your book published regularly. What I'm saying is that those practices are no longer in effect. It was them going through their growing pains. I haven't heard any horror stories since the early days. Image is a totally different company these days. But that's also because the original founders are no longer interested in being directly involved. They made their money and moved on. Stan Lee isn't stifling Jack Kirby's contributions to the MU anymore either, but we still discuss the injustices done earlier on.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 11, 2018 10:30:31 GMT -5
But I submit to you that , aside from Todd, no one ripped anyones characters off.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,692
|
Post by shaxper on Feb 11, 2018 10:30:50 GMT -5
Right, but there was no risk involved. They went solo only after the cash was flowing in quite nicely.So your point that the image founders took the financial risk is not accurate. There was risk. If the company folded after 2 years, they all risked being blackballed by the other companies. True, but every creator who followed them took that same risk too, so that isn't justification for the founders prioritizing their own work over that of the other guys. That wasn't why he was blacklisted though. One could argue the very reason he co-founded Valiant was because he was already blacklisted.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,692
|
Post by shaxper on Feb 11, 2018 10:32:00 GMT -5
But I submit to you that , aside from Todd, no one ripped anyones characters off. As far as I know, that's correct. My argument has been less about that and more about boxing out the creators who followed them to Image. These people were promised empowerment and left less opportunity to thrive than they were given back at Marvel.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 11, 2018 10:32:44 GMT -5
The reason doesn't matter. The big two control most of the money and he was blocked from getting work although he was a better writer than 90% of the hacks out there.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,692
|
Post by shaxper on Feb 11, 2018 10:33:44 GMT -5
The reason doesn't matter. The big two control most of the money and he was blocked from getting work although he was a better writer than 90% of the hacks out there. It matters for your argument. Shooter's situation was in no way comparable to that of the Image founders.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 11, 2018 10:34:50 GMT -5
But I submit to you that , aside from Todd, no one ripped anyones characters off. As far as I know, that's correct. My argument has been less about that and more about boxing out the creators who followed them to Image. These people were promised empowerment and left less opportunity to thrive than they were given back at Marvel. I understand that Larry Stroman , who did a book called Tribe, made a million dollars from his book. This industry can be hit or miss.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,692
|
Post by shaxper on Feb 11, 2018 10:36:44 GMT -5
As far as I know, that's correct. My argument has been less about that and more about boxing out the creators who followed them to Image. These people were promised empowerment and left less opportunity to thrive than they were given back at Marvel. I understand that Larry Stroman , who did a book called Tribe, made a million dollars from his book. This industry can be hit or miss. Off the first issue, yes. Where did his career go after that? Name me one creator (who wasn't an Image founder) whose career got stronger after joining Image in the '90s. Image didn't try to rob these guys. They just absolutely didn't care about supporting or empowering them after issue #1 (and sometimes they weren't even allowed to get that far).
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,692
|
Post by shaxper on Feb 11, 2018 10:39:28 GMT -5
If I wanted to attach a sinister motive to it (though I have no evidence to do so), one might argue the goal was to take the top artists AWAY from Marvel, not to bring them to Image.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 11, 2018 10:40:44 GMT -5
But why did their career have to be better because of Image? They took their chances like anyone else. Many people flocked to Image to try to hit the " lotto". Mike Grell, Jae Lee, Keith Giffen tried to make it big and get a movie deal. It's a gamble. They had a helluva better chance than getting zilch from Marvel.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 11, 2018 10:42:38 GMT -5
If I wanted to attach a sinister motive to it (though I have no evidence to do so), one might argue the goal was to take the top artists AWAY from Marvel, not to bring them to Image. There was no one left to take. That's why it was a bold move. I understand John Romita Jr. had a book published by Image , too. But he stayed at Marvel. It's nice to have options.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,692
|
Post by shaxper on Feb 11, 2018 10:48:36 GMT -5
But why did their career have to be better because of Image? Because that's what Image promised them, and because it did happen for McFarlane, Liefeld, and Larsen. But my very point is that they were given one lottery ticket each while the founders were given as many as they wanted. If you cannot get your book published regularly, and if your book gets cancelled anytime Liefeld wants to put out a new Youngblood book, how the heck are you supposed to get that winning ticket? These guys were lured away from high profile jobs at Marvel at the near peak of their careers and then utterly stifled after (sometimes) getting out a first issue. I cry foul. Sorry man. I love you, but that's utter b.s. This was a time in which editors like Bob Harrass were giving hot artists total creative control over the books at Marvel, even pushing out veteran creators to make way. these guys were making a fortune at Marvel -- they just weren't getting the royalties. McFarlane got his own f-ing Spidey title with total creative control when Romita had been begging for that luxury for years. Why? Because he gave Spidey big eyes and exaggerated poses. Marvel treated these guys like kings. I mention again that, when you look over all the old interviews about the founding of Image, only McFarlane EVER speaks ill of Marvel because they wouldn't give him everything he wanted. There's a classic interview with all the founders where McFarlane goes off on Marvel, and all the other Image founders just get really quiet. The Big Two absolutely should have paid royalties (and they do now), but that was never what this was really about. What, did Todd want royalties on Spidey? Of course, he did (erroneously) claim he created Venom. The dude was an entitled little prig, and he turned Image into a mouthpiece for his tantrums. All the rest of the founders wanted was an opportunity to put their own ideas to work instead of having to use established Marvel properties.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,692
|
Post by shaxper on Feb 11, 2018 10:49:38 GMT -5
If I wanted to attach a sinister motive to it (though I have no evidence to do so), one might argue the goal was to take the top artists AWAY from Marvel, not to bring them to Image. There was no one left to take. Wait...what? I mean, they were announcing a new signing practically every month beginning with Whilce Portacio.
|
|