Advertise on Eye on ComicsIronic Man
Posted by Don MacPherson on May 6th, 2008
As I noted in an earlier post, I enjoyed the new Iron Man movie, and I’m pleased to read a few reports online that it’s driven moviegoers to comics shops in search of comics featuring Shellhead. There were a couple of moments in the film that took me right out of it, such as the over-the-top notion of stripper/stewardesses on the protagonist’s private aircraft. But also frustrating but rather interesting is a key line uttered by the villain of the story, portrayed adeptly by Jeff Bridges.
In a climactic scene, Bridges’s Obadiah Stane berates Robert Downey Jr.’s Tony Stark for having the gall to believe that just because Stark conceived of and created a particular invention that it belongs to him. The line, to the best of my recollection, is something to the effect of, “Just because you have an idea, Tony, it doesn’t mean it belongs to you.” Stane is more than just the villain of the movie. He represents corporate greed, the counterpart to Stark’s newfound sense of corporate responsibility. That’s one of the morals of a story from Marvel Entertainment’s film division? Really?
Obviously, media companies have been mining the minds of creative people for decades in work-for-hire agreements, and such a warm, fuzzy liberal message in a pop-culture product is hardly a new plot concept. But in the world of super-hero comics publishing, from which this new big-screen blockbuster was hatched, the notion of creator rights and transgressions against them are far more prominent in the collective consciousness of the industry and its audience than one finds in other media.
To be fair, the movie does acknowledge the creative efforts of comic-book talent. Stan Lee has his customary cameo in the flick, and the end credits acknowledge that the property was originally develop by Lee, Larry Lieber, Don Heck and Jack Kirby. But what about Denny O’Neil, Luke McDonnell and Mark Bright, the writer and artists who developed the Obadiah Stane/Iron-Monger concepts in the early to mid 1980s? What about David Michelinie and Bob Layton for introducing James Rhodes (Terrence Howard’s character in the movie) into the Iron Man cast in 1979? What about Ultimates creators Mark Millar and Bryan Hitch, who were the first ones to suggest a certain actor in the role of a certain director of a super-spy organization?
In recent years, Marvel’s competition, DC Comics, is the comics publisher that comes to mind when one considers creators’ rights. It recently lost a court bid to block the family of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel from taking back part ownership of the most iconic super-hero of them all. Mind you, DC also has a better track record than Marvel when it comes to offering creator-ownership deals (mainly through its Vertigo imprint).
Of course, Marvel Comics isn’t without sin in the creative-rights department either. I can’t help but wonder, though, what Marv Wolfman, for example, would think when/if he sees that scene with Downey and Bridges, when that key piece of dialogue exploring the conflict between creative and corporate thinking. Wolfman, of course, unsuccessfully sued Marvel over the copyright of the vampire-hunting hero Blade, which he created for a 1973 Tomb of Dracula comic. Blade spawned a successful film franchise as well. The late Steve Gerber also clashed with Marvel over Howard the Duck (which spawned an unsuccessful film).
Most viewers won’t flinch when Bridges utters that noteworthy line, but it gave me a tinge of cringe, if only for a moment.
May 6th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Iron Man was practically flawless as a superhero flick; its makers drop some pretty obvious sequel hints too… I’m thinking the next one should be equally great.
May 6th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Amen, brother.
As only a casual observer of the current comics scene who “came of age” during the Kirby original art controversy in the 80′s, I am continually surprised at the lack of outrage over the sins of corporate comics past. The movie quote you offered is cringe-worthy indeed as is the lack of discussion in the comics community about how corporations sucked the life out of their greatest creators. I hope Siegel’s heirs never have to work another day in their lives as a result of recent developments in the Superman case but it’s still not doing Jerry a helluva lot of good.
May 6th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
And as for the existence of a certain spy and the defence/intel agency most people think of in connection with him, it’s back to Lee and Kirby again…but then, they’ve already gotten on-screen credit for Shellhead himself.
I noticed, while we’re on the subject, someone else caught the creator credits on the box of X3 for Wolverine, Colossus and possibly one or two other characters as well. It might well be that we’ll see more of what you’re suggesting in future installments from Marvel.
Here’s hoping.
May 6th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Dwight wrote:
I noticed, while we’re on the subject, someone else caught the creator credits on the box of X3 for Wolverine, Colossus and possibly one or two other characters as well. It might well be that we’ll see more of what you’re suggesting in future installments from Marvel.
Well, screen credit is one thing. But let’s face facts… the real credit is cash.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Iron Man was indeed a good comic-book movie. It was also a good movie. But I still wouldn’t rate it higher than a B. Will I see it again? Yes, once, maybe twice more, but I won’t buy it.
Glad that you mentioned the line about ownership. To me, it was merely standard corporate villain talk until reading this piece. Reading this made me think more about it. I agree with your viewpoint. The corporations of this little industry need to treat the creators a bit better.
May 7th, 2008 at 2:41 am
I’m always surprised how comic books fans are always eager to embrace comic book-based movies. I think the movies are bad for the medium. They ruin the imagination of the comic book reader and they lure the comic book company brass toward directing their product toward an eventual movie. How many times do we have to go through the consumer cycle of hearing news about a new movie, getting hyped up and excited, going out and buying the comics the movie is based on, then seeing the movie while realising it is just a turd pile. For every one good movie, there are twenty bad ones. I’m not trying to raise my nose at anybody, nor do I think I am more of a purist, I just don’t get the appeal of the movies. It’s funny how small a role the actual comic books play in the comic book fan universe.
May 7th, 2008 at 8:22 am
White Dragon, really? Do you think the same way about books into movies? I know Crichton’s run between his books and movies made it tough to read anything of his after his original publication of “Jurassic Park.” That book was a fun and made for a good time as a movie adaptation. Every book after that, including non-dinosaur ones, basically were written in such a way that you could almost hear the book being adapted into a screenplay.
I don’t think this is the case with superhero movies. I don’t think the track record is as bad as 1:20, either. 2 out of 3 X-films were good to great. 2 out of 3 Spidey as well. 3 out of 3 Superman films were good (I am including the new one in the count). 3 out of 5 Batman movies were good (soon to add a new one by the looks of it this summer) and this doesn’t include the awesome track record of the animated Batman flicks. 2 out of 3 Blade movies were decent to good (and I actually liked the TV series once it got up and running.
Yes, 1 out of 1 Daredevil movies were horrible as was the Electra follow up. I hear mixed things about Ghost Rider (I have friends who fall on either side of the suck/doesn’t suck fence).
Non supers movies have fared even better. I loved Ghost World, American Splendor, Sin City and History of Violence. Non-comic supers movies can do well, too. I honestly can’t think of a better comic book movie than The Incredibles.
Comics have been translated into moving pictures almost as long as there have been comics and with varying degrees of success going back to the Superman cartoons of the mid-20th century, Superman and Batman serials, Flash Gordon serials and movies, etc. It is a natural fit and, like any author will say about a bad movie adaptation (or even a good one) it doesn’t change the fact that the original work remains and by every indication at my local comic store, a comic book movie brings people in who buy comics that haven’t been adapted into comics.
Let’s face it, Comic Books are more and more a niche hobby. Kids aren’t collecting them any more like I did when I was a youngster. They are overpriced and hardly as available and so steeped in adult issues or continuity crises that bringing someone new into the fold requires care. Nothing does that better than a good comic book movie. I was in the shop this past Saturday and saw actual kids in the comic store asking the owner about Iron Man books to read…and I listened, too, as I haven’t read much Iron Man but now want to. But seriously, kids buying comics again in a store usually filled with older men like myself. It was a nice site to see and honestly came from a quality movie that paid respect (if not deep enough respect as Don pointed out) to comic book origins.
Don’t like them, don’t see them but don’t be so quick to sideline them into non-existence. Our hobby can’t handle that.
May 7th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Don’t Micheline and Layton have an Iron Man book coming out today?
I think what you are asking for is a little difficult because it’s easy as all hell to define who may or may not created the original character, but defining which interpretation of the character that’s being used is hard as hell. Daredevil belongs to who, Lee + Ditko or Miller or Bendis? Deadpool is obviously created by Liefeld but it’s Joe Kelly’s version that pretty much nails him. This is a moral issue that doesn’t really fold neatly into a legal and financial one.
You are making a large assumption that these creators haven’t been compensated in ways that are outside of official credit. Are these creators openly complaining about not being treated properly? Some of this stuff is done in such a fashion so as to not cause legal issues later on.
Like I said Micheline and Layton have a book coming out. I feel that the industry overall should fix wfh to better handle stuff like this in the future.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:14 am
Hello, Don, loving the site as per! This is slightly off-message but does the Howard The Duck movie have any redeeming features at all? I’ve seen it in a video store for less than a fiver and I’ve been tempted – or is this just a true reflection of its value ?!?
Keep up the good work!
May 7th, 2008 at 11:15 am
PS LOVED the Iron Man movie!
May 7th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Blair wrote:
This is slightly off-message but does the Howard The Duck movie have any redeeming features at all? I’ve seen it in a video store for less than a fiver and I’ve been tempted
Honestly, I’ve never seen it, only tiny snippets here and there. Reportedly, it’s awful, but who knows?
Oh, and thanks for the kind words, Blair!
May 7th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I actually liked a lot of Howard the Duck. Is it a great movie? No. Does it have a lot of fun bits? YES!
May 8th, 2008 at 2:52 am
Fil, I agree the non-superhero books have been better. I liked Sin City, V for Vendetta and American Splendor. The most recent Superman movie was exactly the type of movie I had in mind when I wrote that post. I thought that the last Batman movie was the only good one that’s been done. They finally did it right after all of those horrible ones. The new one looks pretty good too.
But I mean come on, another Hellboy? Who is gonna warm over that crap caserole. Who’s gonna dip their ladle into that simmering crockpot of poo porage.
I just wish there were more comic book movies aimed at a more mature audience. But you’re right Fil, as long as the kids are happy…(as well as some adults).
May 8th, 2008 at 9:16 am
White Dragon wrote:
But I mean come on, another Hellboy? Who is gonna warm over that crap caserole. Who’s gonna dip their ladle into that simmering crockpot of poo porage.
Well, me, for one. I thoroughly enjoyed the first Hellboy movie.
WD, you seem to confuse your opinion about the quality of a film with actual fact. You’re entitled to your opinion, you make an argument as though there’s no way any reasonable person could come to any other conclusion about certain films, and that’s just not the case.
May 10th, 2008 at 2:42 am
While I may have exaggerated for effect on some of my comments, I still stand by my overall point: the movie studios can do better. They can easily churn out an average or “thoroughly enjoyable” comic book movie and make off with a boatload of cash. I mean look, all of this talk about how Iron Man is one of the best comic book movies to come along in a while and Don, even you only gave it a 7 out of 10.
Don, what percentage of comic book movies would you give a 6 or 7?
What percentage of comic book movies would you give an 8?
And finally, what percentage of comic book movies would you give a 9 or 10?
I won’t mention anything below the 6 mark.
It seems as the the movie studios ar mainly aiming at a younger audience to make the most money. The only people I know who really liked the Hulk movie (not just thinking it was “thoroughly enjoyable) were my friend’s little brother and all of his little rat friends who were in 8th grade. Like I said, I’m glad the kids are having fun, but can’t they try to engage the older crowd a little more?
Yes, the movies can be fun and enjoyable. Fil already mentioned the Xmen and Spidey movies. I’m just a little jaded from all of the Elektras and Ghost Riders in the movie universe. If I’m going to kick down 10 bucks, I at least want to be blown away every once in a while.
May 10th, 2008 at 7:46 am
White Dragon wrote:
While I may have exaggerated for effect on some of my comments, I still stand by my overall point: the movie studios can do better.
*Every* medium can do better. Comics, TV, movies, music… expecting some kind of magic from movie studios once they get their hands on a super-hero property is naive.
My point was that you were writing as though — and continue to do so — that your opinions about certain comic-book movies are objective facts. For example, while I’ve not seen Ghost Rider, I’ve heard from a lot of people who enjoyed it. You didn’t. That’s fine.
Another example: the vast majority of opinions I’ve encountered about the Daredevil movie are that it was poor. I rather enjoyed it, as much as Spider-Man, if not more.
As for me providing ratings for all movies adapted from comic-book material, that’s not going to happen. My numerical ratings aren’t an exact science. They’re affected by my mood, different experiences, different contexts (social, political, personal) at the time… the list goes on.
May 11th, 2008 at 2:56 am
The ratings questions were rhetorical.
Also, comics,tv, movies and music have such a wide variety of choices that viewers can find their niche and seek out works that they think they would like.
Do I expect “magic” from super hero movies? no.
Does it get annoying that the movie studios are going through the motions when they make the super hero movies? Yes.
But what else can you expect? I guess there is a reason Alan Moore doesn’t accept money from the movies based on his works.
I accept your point about difference of opinion.
For me, the Watchmen movie is going to be make or break. If the Watchmen movie flops, I think I’ll leave the movies to everyone else and I’ll shut up.
May 11th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
White Dragon said: “…the movie studios can do better.”
No, they can’t this is as good as it gets. The movie studios get most of their successful films from independent producers. The studios merely have the money to get them in theaters.