| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the one hand, it seems like another Marvel generally OK-to-good film. Not great, but not the Thor, Ant-man or GotG movies levels of bad.
On the other I'm still pissed about how Marvel stole the name of Captain Marvel.
From whom? That lame-o Shazam guy? The same guy who was the subject of a Superman-infringing lawsuit himself?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
From whom? That lame-o Shazam guy? The same guy who was the subject of a Superman-infringing lawsuit himself?On the one hand, it seems like another Marvel generally OK-to-good film. Not great, but not the Thor, Ant-man or GotG movies levels of bad.
On the other I'm still pissed about how Marvel stole the name of Captain Marvel.
Yep. My understanding is Foster Comics lost their lawsuit to DC a long long time ago, and the trademark on Captain Marvel was lost. While no Shazam-family comics were being published (Foster went under, DC hadn't yet purchased the rights to the Shazam-family), Marvel started publishing Captain Marvel (Mar-Vell) and established a new trademark fair and square. This is not "stealing"--and at the time there was no indication the Foster Comics characters would ever be published again, since the company itself was gone, and the hero considered a thing of the past. By the time DC got the rights full on to Foster's properties, Marvel already had the rights. I think there was a period of time where they gave DC the leeway to use the name Captain Marvel while they themselves weren't publishing Captain Marvel comics, but they always had the right to assert claim to the trademark.
It sucks that there's two and it's confusing (and my dad's favorite hero was Shazam's Captain Marvel when he was a little boy, so I vicariously have a deep fondness for Billy Batson and his original hero name, for I can hear in my mind my dad shouting it proudly), but trying to make it a thing--on either company's count--of rivalry, theft, or guile is really overlooking that it was largely issues of circumstance and taking opportunities where they popped up, and nothing more sinister than that.
Customer Service & Community Manager
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are Blockbusters still around, or was that a retro scene?
There's still one :) Twitter account for The Lone Blockbuster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are Blockbusters still around, or was that a retro scene?There's still one :) Twitter account for The Lone Blockbuster.
There can be only one!
Yep. My understanding is Foster Comics lost their lawsuit to DC a long long time ago, and the trademark on Captain Marvel was lost. While no Shazam-family comics were being published (Foster went under, DC hadn't yet purchased the rights to the Shazam-family), Marvel started publishing Captain Marvel (Mar-Vell) and established a new trademark fair and square. This is not "stealing"--and at the time there was no indication the Foster Comics characters would ever be published again, since the company itself was gone, and the hero considered a thing of the past. By the time DC got the rights full on to Foster's properties, Marvel already had the rights. I think there was a period of time where they gave DC the leeway to use the name Captain Marvel while they themselves weren't publishing Captain Marvel comics, but they always had the right to assert claim to the trademark.
Oh, I'm reasonably familiar with the issue - I was just making fun of the big red boy scout. Fawcett Comics certainly hadn't made their lives easier for their defense by actually infringing on Superman stories that National/DC was publishing. They had that judgment coming...
, but trying to make it a thing--on either company's count--of rivalry, theft, or guile is really overlooking that it was largely issues of circumstance and taking opportunities where they popped up, and nothing more sinister than that.
Ehhhh… I'm sure there's more than a little blatant rivalry going on there. Since they've gotten that trademark they've jumped through hopes to keep the trademark. Something like a new book published every two years? They've had over 12 volumes printed using 7 different Captains...
They know DC would scoop it up in a hot minute, so they're going out of their way throwing any crap out they can just to keep the trademark from them.
@thejeff
The could at least show or mention the Baxter Building. :)
When Happy was talking about them selling Avengers tower back in Spider-man Homecoming... My first thought was that will be the new Baxter/Four Freedom's building.
Which in my mind meant they had been planning the merger for a while now :P
OOOOOR it's a complete coincidence... but really who would... or COULD by Avengers towers??? Labs, hangars, no problem with it being busted up by killer robots... It's really niche market :P
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did you see her "cat" in the movie poster?
but OMG are the jerks out in force on this one. All these so called "Huge fan of Captain Marvel for xx years" outraged that they have turned the character into a woman.
which leaves me thinking
either they don't know the difference between DC and Marvel comics and who owns which version of Captain Marvel.
or they don't know about one of the most famous Mar-vel stories, when he died back in the 80s.
either way they can't be much of a fan.
one guy complaining about it being a "historically male role" and I'm like. It's been a woman 90% of the last 40 years.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a huge fan of Captain Marvel and giving the name to Carol Danvers in 2012 was the best thing they've done for the name and legacy since The Death of Captain Marvel, hands down.
FWIW, I never thought Captain Marvel was a good name for Monica Rambeau. Both the names Photon and Spectrum are more fitting to what she actually does.
but OMG are the jerks out in force on this one. All these so called "Huge fan of Captain Marvel for xx years" outraged that they have turned the character into a woman.which leaves me thinking
either they don't know the difference between DC and Marvel comics and who owns which version of Captain Marvel.or they don't know about one of the most famous Mar-vel stories, when he died back in the 80s.
either way they can't be much of a fan.
one guy complaining about it being a "historically male role" and I'm like. It's been a woman 90% of the last 40 years.
Well, to be fair... like I said, there seven different Captain Marvels... and Carol didn't take the name till 2012. Monica had it for less than 10 years... and she's probably the next most famouus Captain
.Any long time fan from at least the 90's could just as easily be talking about Mar-Vell, Genis-Vell, khn'yr or Noh-var. None of which are worthy of a movie but they still have their fans and at least Genis got a LOT of exposure there for a while as the 'Son of the original Mar-vell'
Monica, Phyla-Vell and now Carol are the only women in that group... and they didn't take up 90% of the names' history.
|
@thejeff
The could at least show or mention the Baxter Building. :)
When Happy was talking about them selling Avengers tower back in Spider-man Homecoming... My first thought was that will be the new Baxter/Four Freedom's building.
Which in my mind meant they had been planning the merger for a while now :P
OOOOOR it's a complete coincidence... but really who would... or COULD by Avengers towers??? Labs, hangars, no problem with it being busted up by killer robots... It's really niche market :P
Possibly a little planning in advance if the merger went the right way, and if it didn't, eh just a sentence in a movie.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I'm reasonably familiar with the issue - I was just making fun of the big red boy scout. Fawcett Comics certainly hadn't made their lives easier for their defense by actually infringing on Superman stories that National/DC was publishing. They had that judgment coming...
Yep. My understanding is Foster Comics lost their lawsuit to DC a long long time ago, and the trademark on Captain Marvel was lost. While no Shazam-family comics were being published (Foster went under, DC hadn't yet purchased the rights to the Shazam-family), Marvel started publishing Captain Marvel (Mar-Vell) and established a new trademark fair and square. This is not "stealing"--and at the time there was no indication the Foster Comics characters would ever be published again, since the company itself was gone, and the hero considered a thing of the past. By the time DC got the rights full on to Foster's properties, Marvel already had the rights. I think there was a period of time where they gave DC the leeway to use the name Captain Marvel while they themselves weren't publishing Captain Marvel comics, but they always had the right to assert claim to the trademark.
I was adding on to what you said for Bjorn's sake, not yours. :) I quoted you to continue the conversation, not replying per se. Sorry for the confusion.
And thank you, yes, it was Fawcett Comics.
, but trying to make it a thing--on either company's count--of rivalry, theft, or guile is really overlooking that it was largely issues of circumstance and taking opportunities where they popped up, and nothing more sinister than that.Ehhhh… I'm sure there's more than a little blatant rivalry going on there. Since they've gotten that trademark they've jumped through hopes to keep the trademark. Something like a new book published every two years? They've had over 12 volumes printed using 7 different Captains...
They know DC would scoop it up in a hot minute, so they're going out of their way throwing any crap out they can just to keep the trademark from them.
Or, Marvel knows it's stupid to lose a trademark for any reason, because *cough* it's embarrassing when someone goes "hey, no one will ever use that again" and then someone else swipes the rights and makes buckets of money off it. They learned from DC and Fawcett's mistakes, maybe, but did what they needed to to keep it out of good business sense.
(BTW, I have for most of my life been a DC Girl. My Marvel fandom, with the exception of some enjoyment of Spider-Man and the F4 in my youth, is fairly new. I don't like some recent things DC has done but they've produced a lot of heroes I love, Billy Batson and friends included, and I want them to have nice things. My defense here of Marvel is not borne of liking one company or another better, I am just refusing to see monsters under the bed when it's just plain old dust bunnies.)
Besides, to my knowledge DC and Marvel made good on the arrangement. Half the time most people called Billy Batson "Shazam" anyway (even though it was the wizard's name) so they just switched to what a good deal of the public perceived as his name anyway. I don't think Marvel and DC are upset about it, so there's no reason for anyone else's panties to get into a twist over it.
Did you see her "cat" in the movie poster?
If we don't get an Easter Egg/end credits scene or scene in A4 where Rocket is viciously chasing Chewie down screaming "DIE FLERKEN!" I will be sad.
but OMG are the jerks out in force on this one. All these so called "Huge fan of Captain Marvel for xx years" outraged that they have turned the character into a woman.which leaves me thinking
either they don't know the difference between DC and Marvel comics and who owns which version of Captain Marvel.or they don't know about one of the most famous Mar-vel stories, when he died back in the 80s.
either way they can't be much of a fan.
one guy complaining about it being a "historically male role" and I'm like. It's been a woman 90% of the last 40 years.
Fake nerds. I'm pretty sure most of the idiots making those claims have ever read a Captain Marvel comic, DC or Marvel. In fact, they may have never read a comic (save perhaps for the pictures). They're just dumbass MRAs looking to start fights on Twitter, because they certainly don't have any jobs, friends, hobbies, or significant others to waste their time on.
IIRC these are also the people who think the new "Batwoman" tv series is about a genderbent Bruce Wayne, and/or that Kate Kane is a brand new invention whose history, say, doesn't go back to the early 1960s (if remarkably a different character then).
Did you see her "cat" in the movie poster?
but OMG are the jerks out in force on this one. All these so called "Huge fan of Captain Marvel for xx years" outraged that they have turned the character into a woman.
which leaves me thinking
either they don't know the difference between DC and Marvel comics and who owns which version of Captain Marvel.or they don't know about one of the most famous Mar-vel stories, when he died back in the 80s.
either way they can't be much of a fan.
one guy complaining about it being a "historically male role" and I'm like. It's been a woman 90% of the last 40 years.
there are a lot of people who have issues with how the lawsuit was handled(yes they are still around), along with straight up ignorant folks. I remember some people having issues with her becoming captain marvel anyhow, especially as something was going on in the shazam comic at the time- people accused marvel of wanting to ride coattails and split the fan base. I dont remember. It's been a while and I am not actually a fan.
there are a lot of people who have issues with how the lawsuit was handled(yes they are still around), along with straight up ignorant folks. I remember some people having issues with her becoming captain marvel anyhow, especially as something was going on in the shazam comic at the time- people accused marvel of wanting to ride coattails and split the fan base. I dont remember. It's been a while and I am not actually a fan.
was that when they were doing that weird power quest thing with Freddy
there are a lot of people who have issues with how the lawsuit was handled(yes they are still around), along with straight up ignorant folks. I remember some people having issues with her becoming captain marvel anyhow, especially as something was going on in the shazam comic at the time- people accused marvel of wanting to ride coattails and split the fan base. I dont remember. It's been a while and I am not actually a fan.was that when they were doing that weird power quest thing with Freddy
the only person who might know would be DQ actually.
Oh, I'm reasonably familiar with the issue - I was just making fun of the big red boy scout. Fawcett Comics certainly hadn't made their lives easier for their defense by actually infringing on Superman stories that National/DC was publishing. They had that judgment coming...
Yep. My understanding is Foster Comics lost their lawsuit to DC a long long time ago, and the trademark on Captain Marvel was lost. While no Shazam-family comics were being published (Foster went under, DC hadn't yet purchased the rights to the Shazam-family), Marvel started publishing Captain Marvel (Mar-Vell) and established a new trademark fair and square. This is not "stealing"--and at the time there was no indication the Foster Comics characters would ever be published again, since the company itself was gone, and the hero considered a thing of the past. By the time DC got the rights full on to Foster's properties, Marvel already had the rights. I think there was a period of time where they gave DC the leeway to use the name Captain Marvel while they themselves weren't publishing Captain Marvel comics, but they always had the right to assert claim to the trademark.
I was adding on to what you said for Bjorn's sake, not yours. :) I quoted you to continue the conversation, not replying per se. Sorry for the confusion.
And thank you, yes, it was Fawcett Comics.
..., but trying to make it a thing--on either company's count--of rivalry, theft, or guile is really overlooking that it was largely issues of circumstance and taking opportunities where they popped up, and nothing more sinister than that.Ehhhh… I'm sure there's more than a little blatant rivalry going on there. Since they've gotten that trademark they've jumped through hopes to keep the trademark. Something like a new book published every two years? They've had over 12 volumes printed using 7 different Captains...
They know DC would scoop
this is the most sane and measured post I have read from a dc fan in a long, long time.
the only person who might know would be DQ actually.
DQ?
Don Quixote?Dairy Queen?
The Don Q hotel in Dodgeville, Wisconsin?
|
If we don't get an Easter Egg/end credits scene or scene in A4 where Rocket is viciously chasing Chewie down screaming "DIE FLERKEN!" I will be sad.
The Flerkens are alien creatures that resemble cats. Unlike Earth cats, Flerkens can lay eggs where the limit of the eggs they lay are 117. In addition, their mouths contain pocket dimensions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the only person who might know would be DQ actually.there are a lot of people who have issues with how the lawsuit was handled(yes they are still around), along with straight up ignorant folks. I remember some people having issues with her becoming captain marvel anyhow, especially as something was going on in the shazam comic at the time- people accused marvel of wanting to ride coattails and split the fan base. I dont remember. It's been a while and I am not actually a fan.was that when they were doing that weird power quest thing with Freddy
*shakes head* My knowledge of the lawsuit itself is largely long-after-the-fact research (which I fully admit could be flawed; my major thing I was trying to address is DC or Marvel fans trying to villainize either company where it was more like business as usual); I wasn't following either line at the time.
Amby is the local Carol Danvers expert. I am assuming she hasn't posted to this thread in a bit because she has the trailer on continual replay.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
the only person who might know would be DQ actually.DQ?
Don Quixote?
Dairy Queen?
The Don Q hotel in Dodgeville, Wisconsin?
I can't lay claim to the hotel, and I hate it when people use the abbreviation for "disqualify" (it's one word, jackasses), but I AM in fact what you get when you cross Don Quixote with Dairy Queen.
DQ Something Different.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the only person who might know would be DQ actually.DQ?
Don Quixote?
Dairy Queen?
The Don Q hotel in Dodgeville, Wisconsin?I can't lay claim to the hotel, and I hate it when people use the abbreviation for "disqualify" (it's one word, jackasses), but I AM in fact what you get when you cross Don Quixote with Dairy Queen.
DQ Something Different.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
*summons a snowstorm*
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am not sure why that makes you happy, Rysky, but I will always accept hugs.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am not sure why that makes you happy, Rysky, but I will always accept hugs.
because SNOW
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Snow kills bugs. I like that. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like that it supports my punching old ladies initiative
DQ, thank you for the cooler weather!
I wonder if the amnesia is temporal travel related?
Oh, I'm reasonably familiar with the issue - I was just making fun of the big red boy scout. Fawcett Comics certainly hadn't made their lives easier for their defense by actually infringing on Superman stories that National/DC was publishing. They had that judgment coming...
Yep. My understanding is Foster Comics lost their lawsuit to DC a long long time ago, and the trademark on Captain Marvel was lost. While no Shazam-family comics were being published (Foster went under, DC hadn't yet purchased the rights to the Shazam-family), Marvel started publishing Captain Marvel (Mar-Vell) and established a new trademark fair and square. This is not "stealing"--and at the time there was no indication the Foster Comics characters would ever be published again, since the company itself was gone, and the hero considered a thing of the past. By the time DC got the rights full on to Foster's properties, Marvel already had the rights. I think there was a period of time where they gave DC the leeway to use the name Captain Marvel while they themselves weren't publishing Captain Marvel comics, but they always had the right to assert claim to the trademark.
Unless I have the history wrong, Fawcett didn't actually infringe on Superman stories. DC, which had pulled legal shenanigans to shut down other competing comic book characters, alleged that Captain Marvel's powers of flight, super speed, and super strength infringed on Superman.
Fawcett actually won the original lawsuit, but DC won a later appeal. The legal battle stretched out for over a decade, by which time sales of superhero comics took a nosedive and Fawcett decided it wasn't worth the money to keep fighting the decision.
I want more Skrulls being punched. :p
Unless I have the history wrong, Fawcett didn't actually infringe on Superman stories. DC, which had pulled legal shenanigans to shut down other competing comic book characters, alleged that Captain Marvel's powers of flight, super speed, and super strength infringed on Superman.Fawcett actually won the original lawsuit, but DC won a later appeal. The legal battle stretched out for over a decade, by which time sales of superhero comics took a nosedive and Fawcett decided it wasn't worth the money to keep fighting the decision.
Fawcett won the original lawsuit because the original judge assumed that DC had abandoned the copyright because a newspaper syndicate left off the copyright mark. The appeal decision states right out that "...it leaves no doubt that the copying was deliberate; indeed it takes scarcely more than a glance at corresponding "strips" of "Superman" and "Captain Marvel" to assure the observer that the plagiarism was deliberate and unabashed." And then reverses the original judgment.
Their is like 8 Marvel characters now that have superman's power. I think they are doing it now just to spite them.
Off the top of my head
Sentry
Hyperion (like hes almost a dead ringer)
Super gladiator (just take away the whole self-esteem part)
Blue marvel (not as close but pretty close)
Thor has a lot in common to but hes probably closer to SHAZAM!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
HYperion is an evil parody of Superman.
The last few comic I've seen him in I would describe him more as cold then evil.
Yeah I'm pretty sure it would just come down to name and iconography. If DC made a super smart stretchy hero with a big tough rock guy and firey smart mouth and a hard to see lady I think they would still get away with it.
I'm ok with it myself. They both have such a drastically different world that even clone characters come off a lot different. the biggest representation of the difference to me is:
Marvel: you can have a street level character fight a top teir threat and it be a reasonable fight so like wolverine who can both get beat by ninjas while also able to fight the hulk and the hulk can on a good day take about anyone.
DC: You can't imagine someone thats not of the justice league level of power fight a justice leaguer without serious work. Simpy put no one beats the bat or the boy scout.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
LONG LIVE THE LEGION!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have never understood the perception that Marvel is more "street level" and DC more "cosmic" in power. Both have stuff all over the place. The whole point of DC's Birds of Prey in its beginnings in the late 90s was to have street level heroes often be "in over their heads" (to use Gorf's words, I believe) and while they dealt with spy noir stuff they also fought rogue clones of Green Lanterns and the like and found ways to come out on top. There's stuff low-to-midlevel like any of the supporting Gotham books, Secret Six, and things I'm probably not thinking of because frankly I haven't been reading much DC lately. Marvel has its ridiculous cosmic level characters, like, indeed, oh, Carol Danvers who could not be beaten in combat by, say, her good friend Jessica Jones (at least not at her current power level). Stuff folks in Marvel Knights face is very different from what the Avengers face from what Nova Corps faces.
I expect more that it's Marvel's mid-power heroes are more popular, and DC's higher tiered ones are, but that's not the same thing.
The real differences I see between DC and Marvel's settings is Marvel is less afraid to tie political implications over the long term into their plots, e.g. the anti-mutant laws and superhero registration act. DC dabbles in political stories but it's often more gimmicky (Lex Luthor is president!). And I guess Marvel does pit their heroes versus other heroes more often so you SEE who-beats-who (which I always thought was a stupid, tried-out storyline) but that's because they have fewer memorable villains (though they do have a few standout villain stars). It also feels like there are MORE supers in the Marvelverse than in the DC verse, especially with all the mutants and inhumans running around; the "metagene" seems more rare, but maybe that's just my perception.
Anyway, how about that Captain Marvel? I hear she's a blast.
Anyway, how about that Captain Marvel? I hear she's a blast.
Who?
In terms of power level, I think it is more an issue of popularity. Street level marvel books are more popular than their cosmic ccounterparts, ditto for cosmic DC books.
Freehold still wants his Mister Terrific jacket dammit. And oh yeah, a series that lasts longer than 5 minutes.
But so long as he is living the dream, we are good.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anyway, how about that Captain Marvel? I hear she's a blast.Who?
ಠ~ಠ
{adds Freehold to list of possible Skrulls}
Edit: I swore I'd posted when the trailer first came out, but AH JISS! it was good. I've watched it over a dozen times so far.
And after this last week and upcoming week in DC politics, I'm sure I'll watch it at least a dozen more times and daydream about empunchening specific non-Skrull !sshats.
|
Anyway, how about that Captain Marvel? I hear she's a blast.Who?ಠ~ಠ
{adds Freehold to list of possible Skrulls}
Edit: I swore I'd posted when the trailer first came out, but AH JISS! it was good. I've watched it over a dozen times so far.
And after this last week and upcoming week in DC politics, I'm sure I'll watch it at least a dozen more times and daydream about empunchening specific non-Skrull !sshats.
Hmmm ... interesting ... can Skrulls be orange? That would explain a LOT ...