Robot 6

Comics A.M. | Hero Initiative, Kirby Museum report Avengers donations

The Avengers #1

Organizations | Tom Spurgeon reports that The Hero Initiative has now received close to $3,000 so far due to campaigns asking those people who watch Marvel’s The Avengers to donate money to the organization. The Jack Kirby Museum, meanwhile, reports it has received $1,300 from Avengers-related giving. [The Comics Reporter, The Kirby Museum]

Conventions | Chris Butcher, co-founder and director of the Toronto Comics Art Festival, reports that about 18,000 people attended this year’s TCAF-related events: “TCAF 2012 was the most ambitious festival yet, and my most ambitious personal undertaking. With more off-site and lead-up events than ever before, more partnerships than in previous years, an additional day of programming, and more than 20 featured guests, I worried in the weeks leading up to the show that perhaps we’d bit off a bit more than we could chew. Luckily through the talent and support of some wonderful folks we had varying levels of success on every front, and as always, lessons were learned and we think 2013 will be even stronger.” [Comics212]

Jack Kirby in the Marvel offices in 1965

Creators | Following a Heritage auction that saw a page from a Jack Kirby-drawn issue of Fantastic Four fetch $155,350, The Wall Street Journal profiles the artist. “Kirby was like Louis Armstrong or Miles Davis in that his touch just elevated what he did,” author and collector Glen David Gold tells the newspaper. “He turned [comics] from junk into something with real emotional depth.” [The Wall Street Journal]

Creators | Tom Spurgeon provides a thorough rundown of the creators of the various characters who appeared in The Avengers film. [The Comics Reporter]

Creators | CNN talks to Stan Lee about the success of The Avengers: “I hate to admit this, but I do not share in the movie’s profits. I just share in the interviews, in the glamour, in the people saying, ‘Wow, I love that movie, Stan’ — but I’m not a participant in the profits.” [CNN]

Creators | Shannon O’Leary reports on how the Cartoon Network has become a “haven for some of the best independent comic book creators working today,” including Sarah Oleksyk and Minty Lewis. [Publishers Weekly]

Baby's in Black

Creators | Matthew Perpetua profiles cartoonist Arne Bellstorf, creator of Baby’s in Black, a graphic novel chronicling the courtship of photographer Astrid Kirchherr and original Beatles bassist Stuart Sutcliffe. [Rolling Stone]

Creators | ESPN chats with professional poker player Giancarlo Antonetti about his upcoming poker-themed comic book Shut Up and Fold. [ESPN]

Process | Brian Fies details the creation of the cover to his graphic novel Whatever Happened to the World of Tomorrow? [The Fies Files]

News From Our Partners

Comments

11 Comments

Someone give Stan a bonus already! I always feel for him that everyone blames him for Jack and Joe not getting credited. Its really not his place to negotiate that kind of thing for them.

Stan Lee is credited as “Old Man in TV Report” and as an executive producer of The Avengers. How does he not get any of the money?

I think what this means is that Stan was paid a salary (or flat fee) as an Executive Producer and credited actor, rather than a percentage of the profits. He gets paid the same whether or not it does well.

Joe, Stan was asked that by the writer of the CNN article:

“Cargill: But aren’t you an executive producer?

Lee: Yes, but it’s just an honorary title.”

Sell It Like It Is

May 16, 2012 at 7:34 am

let’s see… a billion dollars, 3,000 dollars – what a complete joke

Someone give Stan a bonus already! I always feel for him that everyone blames him for Jack and Joe not getting credited. Its really not his place to negotiate that kind of thing for them.

Stan Lee is a wealthy businessman and celebrity (even outside of comics). Sure, whenever he’s asked about creator rights, he plays the wronged creator himself, but in reality, Stan wields tremendous influence when it comes to superheroes. He could have any reasonable demands met if he wasn’t so greedy and cowardly about biting the hand that feeds.

If, for instance, Stan threatened to denounce the Avengers movie and break ties with the company, do you think Marvel Studios wouldn’t immediately concede to a demand of say, one hundredth of one percent of profits from Avengers (stills tens of thousands of dollars) going to the Kirby’s?

Stan wields tremendous influence when it comes to superheroes. He could have any reasonable demands met if he wasn’t so greedy and cowardly about biting the hand that feeds.

LOL. This can’t be serious. If it is do yourself a favor and read up on how real businesses work beyond OWS propaganda before you embarrass yourself with another post like that.

LOL. This can’t be serious. If it is do yourself a favor and read up on how real businesses work beyond OWS propaganda before you embarrass yourself with another post like that.

“LOL I have no counterargument, but ethics make me angry!!!!!!111″

So I Googled “real business” and it turns out you’re right. According to these search results, no person or persons, no matter how seemingly important they are, has any say whatsoever in the operations of a real business. I was shocked to learn that a real business is actually a poltergeist, acting entirely of its own free will.

Cass….

Grow up.

OWS is also manipulated by big businessmen. You’d be surprised who funds them behind the scenes and how the OWS students are cluelessly manipulated… Not as if they were the most coherent or clear-thinking people to begin with!

But, aside from politics which I agree is beside the point, Stan doesn’t have a say in who gets credit or not for the characters.

Most of this stuff has been settled for decades whether people like it or not.
Stan lost his rights to participate in points, too. He doesn’t get a byline for everything he co-created, either…

Yes, he was very afraid to lose his job with Marvel as head cheerleader… Stan’s from a very different time… He’s a product of the Depression. Totally different mentality than people today.
Kirby also didn’t fight at the time he should have, too, and paid a heavy price for that…
Likewise the same for Jerry Siegel at critical times because he didn’t want to come off as the bad guy and really wanted to just get along with people towards the end of his life…

I kind of wish fans would stop trying to vicariously fight battles for people they really don’t know.
Let the old men and their heirs fight their own battles. If they ask for help or donations, do it because YOU want to help not because “some columnist” tells you.

It’s been my observation that a lot of people who write the comics columns are experienced bomb throwers and not the most responsible journalists to begin with… But then again, this hobby does attract a lot of people like that and that’s partly why the industry is in the general mess it’s in. There are not enough grown-ups running the industry and there’s an elementary school playground mentality that rarely gets productive results. It’s too bad that this doesn’t annoy enough people and that the fans keep rewarding this BS.

Also, not everybody is bitter over their experiences with the companies when all’s said and done. I actually met some Golden Agers not long ago who were satisfied with their place in history and had come to terms with DC and Marvel…

I hate to upset the strawman arguments above, but I’ve never been involved in OWS nor do I particularly agree with the movement.

On the whole, I don’t understand the rebuttals to my post. My argument is very clear cut and specific to the case at hand, with an explicit example of what Stan Lee could do (in my opinion), yet the rebuttals talk vaguely in generalities about “real business” and the “playground mentality” of the industry.

What is an example of this “playground mentality”?

Who are these mysterious elementary school students who are “running the industry” and what is child-like about what they do?

What is it about “real business” that makes it impossible for Stan Lee to say “Hey I won’t work with you unless you give to the Kirby estate”?

Why are the facts (i) Stan Lee got screwed a couple times too, (ii) some Golden Agers said they were satisfied, once, relevant to what Stan Lee should do in this specific situation?

I’m so confused.

My Argument: Stan Lee is a prominent figure in the industry who can use his status and influence as a bargaining chip to advocate for creator rights. Ethically, he should do this.

Your Rebuttal: ???

Sell It Like It Is

May 17, 2012 at 8:09 am

@Cass

Unfortunately, Stan taking a stand would probably not make much of a practical difference. He even had to sue Marvel just to get his fair share of money from the first Spider-Man movie. A suit which took him years to win

But, I agree with you, he should speak out. It could help rally support within and without the industry, and it would help bring more attention to creators’ rights issues. Those types of things are usually where change can start

Leave a Comment

 


Browse the Robot 6 Archives