|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 24, 2016 10:36:35 GMT -5
But in order to create that character, he first started a company. Had he remained at Marvel, he wouldn't have but a fraction, of the money he has. I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Kudos to any creator who escapes the slavery of a work-for-hire situation and gets rewarded properly for a successful creation. I wouldn't be surprised if many artists who work for themselves as freelancers incorporate themselves for tax purposes and also hire assistants. This is something that's been going on since the days of newspaper strips. McFarlane and his Image partners were not the first to have done this either. Kirby and Joe Simon for instance had done the same thing. The tragedy is someone like a Steve Ditko who didn't Well, you yourself said it: a successful creation. It was his creation, but it wasn't him who earned al that money, working for third party projects. In particular, I was citing JMS's success outside the medium. For me, that's proof of him being successful at what he does. I'm sure he also gets money from Studio JMS, but that would be the entrepreneur in him, something which doesn't interest me.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jul 24, 2016 11:37:08 GMT -5
:-) Even without Ms Jezebel a thread with "worst" in the title got hijacked by Todd McFarlane. Mr. McFarlane has sold an awful lot of comics books and I've never read him being attached to any terrible stories. Theres been some bad McFarlane art just like there's been some bad Artist X art in existence. So I'm pretty indifferent to his work in the field. I like his run on Spiderman quite well. But everything I hear about the real man is far less objectionable than some of the "greats" even. Though I make a concerted effort to seperate creator from creation; when I hear something like him getting into comic art to pay a family member's (father I think) hospital bills I can't be anymore than indifferent to liking his comic work and influence.
|
|