Battle Off The Screen

Last week, Ghost Rider creator Gary Friedrich was ordered to pay $17,000 dollars to Marvel for past income he made from the Ghost Rider name (this includes convention appearances and paid autographs). Bad news for the retired Gary Friedrich, and, as it turns out, bad press for Marvel. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance opens in theaters in less than a week, and the popular sentiment is such that if Marvel could make millions from Sony’s Ghost Rider sequel, then they can look past snagging Friedrich’s meager earnings. In Marvel’s eyes, Friedrich brought the fight to them, and, frankly, they don’t have reason to care about whether or not he has the money on hand -- it’s theirs.

Secret Wars

It seems that the Friedrich case is the public’s tipping point in a long list of battles in the comic book community over creator rights. 2012 started with the resolution of the long-running battle between writer Neil Gaiman and artist Todd McFarlane over elements Gaiman created in a one-off guest issue of McFarlane’s Spawn. McFarlane incorporated Gaiman’s elements into the overall Spawn mythos, using them in movies, TV, and merchandise without proper compensation. Image Comics, who publishes Spawn and was co-founded by McFarlane, was built on the very concept of creator’s rights, providing a means for former Marvel artists like McFarlane to control their own creations. As such, McFarlane’s actions seem especially hypocritical. Gaiman was eventually awarded half-ownership of his creations and will be giving any of his back earnings to charity.

Shortly after, Change.Org orchestrated an online petition for Marvel to acknowledge artist Jack Kirby’s contribution to the Marvel Universe (he co-created Fantastic Four, Captain America, Hulk, amongst others) and pay royalties accordingly. In July 2011, the courts ruled that due to the nature of Kirby’s work-for-hire arrangement, Marvel retains all of the copyrights for any character Kirby may have created. His estate planned to appeal, but there are no new developments on that front. Change.Org is not asking for that decision to be overturned, but for Marvel to give the same authorship credit to Jack Kirby that Stan Lee maintains and to compensate Kirby’s family in some way for the billions of dollars Marvel has made from his creations.

Confidence in Kirby’s case was inspired, I’m sure, by the recent complicated victory in the battle over the rights of Superman. In May 2011, the estates of Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel were awarded certain rights to the Superman character and elements (but not the trademarks or foreign rights, and this is where it gets complicated -- not all of the elements of Superman that were created independently of Shuster and Siegel). Regardless, it was seen as a major victory, and even though it’s placed Superman’s future up in the air (Warner Brothers may not be able to make more Superman films or use some of the classic Superman elements in the DC comics), the families will finally have a real financial stake in the beloved character. On a side note, many speculate that this is the reason for DC’s recent “New 52” reboot -- to allow the publisher to revamp Superman and cherry-pick only the elements that they have complete legal control over.

DC made recent headlines for going ahead with Watchmen prequels, despite the wishes of Watchmen creator Alan Moore. Moore’s legal agreement allowed those characters to be returned to himself and artist Dave Gibbons after such time DC had no further good use for them. He was unable to predict that Watchmen, once a 12-issue monthly mini-series, would remain alive forever as a best-selling graphic novel (almost unheard of in 1986, when the original issues hit the stands). He turned his back on DC due to what he perceived as legal trickery, and though the publisher tried to woo him back by reverting the rights if he would write new Watchmen material himself, he declined. DC, sensing that there wasn’t a snowball’s chance in Hell that Moore would ever work for them again, considered that bridge burned and went ahead with the Moore-less books. Whatever respectful gentleman’s agreement that former DC head Paul Levitz maintained for Moore by not moving on the project was brushed away with one regime change. It’s telling that Levitz, himself a comic book writer, held out that respect for Moore’s wishes while new DC President Diane Nelson, a former WB branding specialist in charge of franchise management, did not.

Infinite Crisis

Fans seem to be split into two major camps over creator’s rights. Some would like to see all creators receive deserved acknowledgement and compensation, and, in some cases, see those creators win back their creations completely. Others are less sympathetic, with the feeling that these people knew what they were getting into, and they shouldn’t have gotten into bad deals in the first place.

Not to delve too deeply into comic book history, but there was no expectation in 1962 that Spider-Man, for example, would one day become a film franchise that would gross $2.5 billion worldwide after just three films (with a fourth on the way). That’s not even counting Spider-Man merchandise sales. Comics were created as cheap entertainment, printed in the lowest possible quality, meant to be read until they fell apart (or got thrown away by your mom). The comic companies were run by comic book creators, not mega-corporations like Time-Warner (who owns DC) or Disney (who owns Marvel). Times were different.

So, work-for-hire was the norm, and it made sense. An artist or writer would come up with ideas under the employ of a comic book company, and the company retained ownership of those ideas, typically to make more comics. The reason you’re seeing more heated fights over creator’s rights is because the work-for-hire agreement doesn’t look so good in the rear-view mirror. Once a character explodes beyond the comic book page into a billion dollar multi-media entity, then the creator begins to feel that they are entitled to some financial reward beyond the first paycheck.

In the old days, you might see this kind of thing happen. According to Gerard Jones’ book Men of Tomorrow, DC made sure to reward Siegel and Shuster with a kickback in the wake of the first Superman movie’s massive box office success. The new attitude seems to be, “Well, if we give one guy credit, we have to give all the guys credit.” As the pile of money has gotten larger, and the global corporate interests have gotten stronger, the creations are being locked down as corporate financial assets and not pen and ink drawings of guys in capes.

This is why the court ordered Friedrich to pay Marvel back. According to them, he’s used their Ghost Rider brand to financially benefit his career, by taking paid convention bookings as the creator of Ghost Rider and by charging for signed sketches of the character. It makes sense from a legal standpoint -- I can’t run around selling my own Disney merchandise, for example -- but the ruling terrifies comic veterans who make a good portion of their living on the convention circuit. Can they no longer list their most prominent credits to draw attendance? Can a world-famous Batman artist still sell his own original sketches of Batman? For some of these pros, their only means of retirement may soon be coming to a close.

Days of Future Past

An argument could be made that the last significant characters created for either Marvel or DC were back in the 1970s (I’d point to Len Wein’s creations -- Wolverine for Marvel and Swamp Thing for DC). Modern creators today are much more savvy about work-for-hire, and typically the new characters they create are just variations on a company’s existing characters (Red Hulk, Skar, the Miles Morales Spider-Man, Steel, Batwing, just to name a few). It was almost unheard of twenty years ago, but many of the hottest artists and writers peddle their own creator-owned properties with different companies at the very same time they bolster the drawing power of their name through high-profile superhero books for “the big two.”

The old guard shouldn’t be punished for not being able to see into the future, but it places the corporations in an interesting predicament. For the sake of example, let’s say that creators Len Wein and John Romita Sr. received a “Created by...for Marvel Comics” at the start of the film X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Except Wolverine doesn’t appear in Romita’s costume in that film, so is the version we’re seeing technically Romita’s? Let’s change the credit to “Created by Len Wein & John Romita Sr. and Dave Cockrum” since Cockrum first drew Wolverine without his mask (giving him the trademark Wolverine hair-do). Well, none of those guys created Wolverine’s bone claws, only intending for Wolverine to sport metal claws, but the bone claws are a part of the film. Now the credit reads “Created by Len Wein & John Romita Sr. and Dave Cockrum and Fabian Niceza & Scott Lobdell.& Andy Kubert.” We could probably keep going from there.

So, even if an artist didn’t create Wolverine outright, they might have a stake in the way Wolverine is presented in a film if they were the creator that influenced the filmmaker’s portrayal of that character. Do they deserve credit and compensation for that influence, especially if specific examples can be seen in their work? Most would say yes, but then where does a company draw the line? Is it fair to acknowledge the original creator only, excluding all other significant contributions? The version of Green Lantern that hit the big screen was created by John Broome and Gil Kane, but the original creator of Green Lantern as a concept (superhero with a mystical ring) was Martin Nodell. Other than the ring and the name, none of Nodell’s creation was used in the film; Hal Jordan and the sci-fi world of the Green Lantern Corps are completely different than Nodell’s Green Lantern.

Neither Marvel or DC want to open that flood gate. Unless there’s a fight (like the one Marv Wolfman engaged in to get his name on the Blade films), they have no good reason to assign authorship. Once you acknowledge that someone created something, then you have to begin acknowledging everything. It’s one thing to say Stan Lee and Steve Ditko created Spider-Man in the opening crawl of a film, but the character doesn’t live in a vacuum. Should the opening credits also include the artists and writers who created any villains that appear or all of Spidey’s supporting characters like J. Jonah Jameson?

Just days after furor over the Friedrich case, artist Tony Moore announced a suit against writer Robert Kirkman, concerning money owed for his part in illustrating the first few issues of The Walking Dead, which is now a multi-million dollar hit on television. We’ll see more of these cases as the money keeps rolling in. Maybe what’s needed are unions or guilds that protect the comic book professionals in the same manner as entertainment guilds do. There are very specific rules regarding royalties, credits, and authorship that filmmakers get to take advantage of, but that’s because they’re organized. Comic authors are dealing with the aftermath of decades worth of interpretive gentlemen’s agreements from fellow authors, and because those peers have been replaced by corporate shills, there’s no room for flexibility. It’s past time for comic pros to get organized and force the publishers to follow the rules that they establish themselves about what is fair.by john gholson

First Female Action Star

Gina Carano as Mallory Kane in Steven Soderbergh’s Haywire, the camera settles on a close-up of her face. Save for a touch of eyeliner and minor wounds, Mallory’s skin is bare. Her features are naturally striking, but not accentuated, and when we finally see her full body, her form is not swathed in curve-emphasizing fetish wear that trumps style over suitability. When she settles down for a tea and is greeted by an unwelcome face, she cracks her neck, gripes, and waits; she doesn’t finger a hidden, phallic sword; she doesn’t try to seduce the man across from her. They talk, and when he attacks, they fight with harsh fury, not obviously choreographed violence. There is no space for liquid movements that are equally dangerous and sexual – for an explosion of violence to be as alluring as a late-night tryst.

This is because Mallory Kane is a real action hero; the first female ass-kicker with the potential to become a real action star.

As Soderbergh tells it, he’d been itching to make spy movie with a ‘60s edge, but it never quite came together until he saw the Muay Thai kickboxer fighting on television. As he explained to AV Club:
“I saw her fighting on TV, literally by chance, channel-surfing. … I landed on one of her fights, and I just thought, ‘Wow, she’s really something. Kind of an interesting combination of elements.’ She’s beautiful, she’s brutal. When she was interviewed she seemed charming, and not at all weird or freakish, or egotistical. … And when Moneyball blew apart, that very same week she got beat in the last fight she had. I thought, ‘You know, I’ve always wanted to do a spy movie in the sort of ’60s vein. Why don’t I just combine these two things? Make her the spy and build this movie around her. She can break people in half. This could be fun.’”
Soderbergh wasn’t creating a heroine based on lusty admiration, a la Quentin Tarantino creating Kill Bill for Uma Thurman. This wasn’t an attempt at waif-fu, to take the least likely heroine and make her the alluring ass-kicker or irresistible femme fatale. Nor was this an attempt to craft a feminist hero speaking on the divide between men and women like Demi Moore in G.I. Jane. Soderbergh was simply driven by the idea of seeing Carano take on the traditional action hero role: “All I was motivated by was, ‘It would be really cool to see a woman do this stuff for real.’”
This switch in motive makes all the difference. Haywire is, by all intents and purposes, a classic action movie. It’s designed to titillate the audience with a larger-than-life ass-kicker who rules dynamic fight sequences, backed by a basic story that does nothing more than act as an entertaining path for Carano’s physical prowess to shine. Kane is the top muscle in a network of for-hire force, and her moves drive the narrative. As such, there is no interest or need to make her walk the tight-rope like the tough heroines who preceded her – great, dynamic, and adored women we might love, but who were always framed somewhat or largely by gender expectations.
For decades, Ellen Ripley has reigned supreme in the world of tough, unstoppable heroines, and for the most part, she is. She was a game-changer for women in cinema, busting through barriers and being named not only the best female heroine cinema has seen, but one of the best characters we've ever seen. Nevertheless, Ripley was never able to exist without scenes and plots focusing on her gender. In Alien, she’s choked with a phallic, rolled magazine, and much more damningly, stripped to ill-fitting bikini briefs so the camera can watch the crack of her behind as Ripley bends to do some work before the final, vulnerable attack. This sexualization became even more distinct in Aliens, as her fellow female hypersleepers wore shorts and more suitable tank tops as she still walked around in skimpy garb. But with that sexual, feminine door open, every bit of power emanating from Ripley became increasingly connected to her sex. She became a mother figure for Newt, an impregnated mother and host for the alien in Alien 3, and finally mother of an alien child with Alien Resurrection.
Sarah Connor was similarly tough, but always defined as the expendable mother striving to save her hero son. Alice in Resident Evil kicked ass in a sexy dress, in a film bookended by glimpses of her barely-covered body. Kill Bill was about a vengeful bride, eager for payback after losing her husband and baby, a sexy, leather-clad lady kicking the arses of other sexy ladies. Nikita was the young and sexy femme fatale. Lara Croft was as much about boobs and butt as she was about smarts and strength. Angelina Jolie’s Salt was much closer to the mark, but still framed as the femme fatale, and though very actively involved in her own stunts, still a sexy, waif-fu heroine. Zoe Saldana is now making her mark, but as another capable, yet sexy, ass-kicker. As GQ described her recently: “Like Jolie, Saldana's physicality— all fluid angles and long lines—is part of what makes her so much fun to watch; before the bad guys are finished staring, they're already dead.”
Saldana is also the woman amongst male cohorts, much like Michelle Rodriguez, the closest we’ve come to a gender-neutral action star to date. As a young girl, she starred in Girlfight, denying the female-framed expectations placed on her to become a fight champion. But it was an indie film, seen by a modest audience. She’s strived to stay type-cast in strong roles, “My entire career is made up of those girl-power moments. I don't mind typecasting because I know what the alternative is,” but her type-cast trajectory is also a fully supporting one. From the soldier Rain Ocampo, to the sexy driver Letty, to the space-travelling Trudy Chacon, her action-star potential is marginalized into often painfully brief blips in other characters’ cinematic quests.
In Haywire, everyone plays support on Kane’s quest – Channing Tatum, Michael Fassbender, Antonio Banderas, Ewan McGregor, and even Michael Douglas. As with any big action star – Schwarzenegger, Willis, Stallone, Norris, Seagal, Van Damme… – Carano’s skill is all that matters. And it isn’t that Kane’s gender is removed; it’s just irrelevant. This is the first mainstream film that allows its female action star to be tough without the ever-rampant signifiers that cling to strong heroines.
She has sex, but we don’t see it. She showers, but it’s not so that the audience can delight in her body; in fact, the audience doesn’t get to see it. She gets a “babysitting job” where she must play the attractive wife, but it’s framed no differently than a man putting on a tux. She has a father, but he doesn’t oversee her violence, nor condemn it; he’s merely concerned as any parent would be. We are aware that she is a woman, but we are not forced to see her as mother, as sex object, or even as completely macho man-woman (like Pvt. Vasquez in Aliens). Each has its place, but it is wildly invigorating to see an action film where gender politics and gender stereotypes do not come into play.
Soderbergh’s camera is so intent on showcasing Carano’s skill that it rests and doesn’t cut away from the impact. The violence is not softened or amplified by a score, and rather than choreographed into some slick dance, it’s brutal ferocity shown as bluntly as any match fight would be. Soderbergh wants us to see a woman who can actually deliver the power of an ass-kicking heroine, and he doesn’t let anything get in that way. She delivers violence and receives it. She’s damaged, bandaged, and never carried away from the fight in a powerful man’s arms a la Helen Mirren in Red. Haywire is all about power. Her power. Though some, like Jezebel, worry that Carano’s voice being altered for the film is a move to make her “sound sexy,” it’s just another piece of her obvious authority. You see her, you hear her, and you watch her in action, continually knowing she’s an unstoppable powerhouse.
Haywire plays to Carano’s strengths. This is a fighter with little acting experience, but Soderbergh is able to coax a powerful charisma within her, which teamed with the fight scenes, offers a woman quite adept at leading the action world. In fact, situated in an environment where the weaker geek is increasingly becoming the hero (Green Hornet, 21 Jump Street), Mallory Kane is helping to keep intimidation and skilled prowess in the action world.
Quite simply, Mallory Kane is a dynamic powerhouse we can believe in. She wasn’t crafted by man. She is not pinned behind the male gaze. We are not forced to lust after her with sexy makeup, pouty lips, and slow, revealing shots of her skin. If we find ourselves attracted to her, or as I put it after watching the screening – enamored by her, it has nothing to do with sexual expression. It’s admiration based on skill with no qualifiers needed. It’s just like the male action stars we’ve come to love over the past 30-40 years. Mallory Kane simply delivers adrenaline-filled action, no qualifiers necessary.
We just need Hollywood to recognize this and let this be more than a one-off anomaly.by monika bartyzel

Giveaway: Real Steel

Blu-ray.com and Walt Disney Home Entertainment are offering three Blu-ray.com members the opportunity to win a copy of director Shawn Levy's Real Steel, starring Hugh Jackman, Evangeline Lilly and young Dakota Goyo. Real Steel rock-em, sock-em's its way onto Blu-ray on January 24th.

To enter, simply add a comment to this news post with your favorite film or films that feature robots. (There are no right or wrong answers.)

The Real Steel contest is open to all Blu-ray.com members (membership is completely free, click here to join). Entrants will never be asked or required to post any personal information whatsoever on Blu-ray.com, and will only ever be identified by their Blu-ray.com username. Winners will be asked to provide full name and a valid mailing address via PM, but their personal information will not be shared or retained in any way. Maintaining our membership's privacy is of the utmost importance. The contest will close on Monday, January 23rd at approximately 11:59pm EST, and three randomly selected winners will be contacted soon thereafter via Blu-ray.com PM.

Note: prizes that are not claimed within seven days will be awarded to other entrants.by webmaster

Contraband

 Former smuggler from New Orleans faces ruthless drug lords, vicious criminals, corrupt officials, and trigger-happy hit men after getting back into the business to help his brother-in-law settle a deadly debt. When it came to transporting illicit goods under treacherous circumstances, Chris Farraday (Mark Wahlberg) used to be the best in the business. But all of that changed when he chose to give up his life of crime to start a family with Kate (Kate Beckinsale). Chris learns that leaving his past behind is easier said than done, however, after Kate's brother Andy (Caleb Landry Jones) goes to work for ferocious drug lord Tim Briggs (Giovanni Ribisi), and drops the ball on a major deal. Now, in order to set things right, Chris must smuggle millions of dollars in counterfeit bills from Panama into the United States. And if anything goes wrong, Tim will target his entire family for death. With his best friend Sebastian (Ben Foster) by his side and a crackerjack crew along for the ride, Chris heads to Panama for one last job. Later, with time running out and a treacherous maze of desperate criminals to navigate, the job gets complicated, and Chris must race to reach his family before Tim gets to them first

The Beauty And The Beast 3D

 success of presenting The Lion King in 3D, Disney has converted its beloved Beauty and the Beast to 3D and is opening it in theaters everywhere today. It's not the first time a studio has breathed new life into a catalog title and reaped the box-office benefits. At home, more and more people are buying 3D-capable HDTVs and connecting them to Blu-ray 3D players (if you have a Playstation 3, you already own a 3D-capable player and might not have even known). There are a variety of Blu-ray 3D titles now available from nature documentaries to violent R-rated horror movies like Saw 3D, but there is also a long list of animated 3D favorites available on disc as well as via streaming on cable On Demand. Beauty and the Beast, for example, has been available on Blu-ray 3D since October.
Not all 3D conversions are created equal because sometimes the original source material has more natural depth in one movie than another. That is why stop-motion favorites like The Nightmare Before Christmas and Coraline pop more than others at home because real 3D models were used and posed during filming. Be careful when you are picking up the 3D version of Coraline—the movie was released previously on DVD and Blu-ray packaged with those headache-inducing anaglyph glasses. You'll know you're getting the correct version by looking for "Blu-ray 3D" printed at the top of the plastic case.
One of the most breathtaking and underrated animated titles available on Blu-ray 3D and cable VOD is Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole. The movie did not hoot a lot of loot in theaters, but the extreme details of the owls' feathers and features as they soar through the sky look phenomenal in three dimensions.
More popular and kid-friendly are the Disney and Pixar favorites on Blu-ray 3D, including all three Toy Story movies, The Lion King, Cars 2, Bolt, A Christmas Carol, Monsters vs. Aliens, Tangled, Gnomeo & Juliet, Meet the Robinsons, G-Force and Chicken Little. Expect the mega-hit Up to drop in on Blu-ray 3D soon, too, since it just debuted on the format in the UK.
Not content to let Disney have all the fun, other studios have tinkered with animation in three dimensions with wildly varying degrees of success. Sony produced the acclaimed Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs as well as Monster House, Open Season and the panned The Smurfs, although the latter inserts animated characters into the real world. Universal has the little yellow minions of Despicable Me and Weinstein released Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil on Blu-ray 3D. Paramount distributes Megamind and DreamWorks' lauded How to Train Your Dragon and all four Shrek movies exclusively at Best Buy. Fox comes to the 3D party with Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs and the colorful birds of Rio. Warner Bros. rounds out the list with the stop-motion animated The Polar Express and Yogi Bear, which animated the two lead bears and had them act opposite real actors like Anna Faris.
Does 3D make a mediocre animated movie suddenly dazzling? Of course not—just look at The Smurfs and Yogi Bear, which stink in any dimension. However, if you have a 3D setup and are in line to see Beauty and the Beast this weekend in theaters, you might want to make it pop out of your screen at home along with some other Blu-ray 3D.by robert b.de salvo

THE DEVIL INSIDE 1-06-2012

A young woman learns that her mother committed multiple murders while undergoing an exorcism, and she travels to Rome with a film crew on a mission to uncover the truth about that horrific incident in this found-footage-style possession shocker from director William Brent Bell. As a young girl, Isabella Rossi (Fernanda Andrade) had been led to believe that the killings were committed after her mother flew into a psychotic rage. But when Isabella finds evidence indicating that an exorcism was being conducted on her mother at the time, she enlists a film crew to follow her to Italy in search of the truth. In order to gain a better understanding of the spiritual plight that her mother endured, Isabella and her crew attend a series of unsanctioned exorcisms that become increasingly terrifying

Movies.com: The Year in Film: 2011's Biggest Surprises

Movies.com: The Year in Film: 2011's Biggest Surprises