ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 851
Aug 1 11 1:41 PM
Aug 1 11 1:49 PM
Posts: 4692
Aug 1 11 1:53 PM
Medieval Guy wrote: Is there even such a thing as a "created by" credit in Hollywood?
Posts: 1816
Aug 1 11 2:03 PM
alexarkadin wrote: czeskleba wrote: Alex, I don't know why you are so focused on the character creation issue in this discussion. The judge makes it clear she is not ruling on who created the characters. The rationale she uses for determining the work Kirby did was for hire would apply regardless of whether Kirby created everything himself, Stan created everything himself, or something in between. The judge doesn't even appear to completely accept Lee's version of events. In her description of the creation of the FF, she writes that "Lee and Kirby co-created the Fantastic Four. At their first plotting conference, Lee and Kirby discussed ideas for the first issue. Kirby then produced the pencil drawings for the issue." That certainly doesn't gibe with Lee's version of events... if anything, it sounds more like Evanier's scenario.The judge mentions earlier that FF #1 was based on a plot outline created by Stan Lee before ever speaking to Kirby. Her ruling is kind of sloppy and misstates a number of trivial facts, like the comment about Nick Fury. In Lee's depositions for the case he goes through ever major character created during the years in question and says the same thing every time. He created the characters before ever speaking to the artists, and gave the characters and plots to the artists to pencil. This question should be easy to clear up. Stan Lee does interviews very often. All anyone need do is ask him one question:"Mr. Lee can you name one character during the years 1958-1963 which Jack Kirby created alone and brought to you?"
czeskleba wrote: Alex, I don't know why you are so focused on the character creation issue in this discussion. The judge makes it clear she is not ruling on who created the characters. The rationale she uses for determining the work Kirby did was for hire would apply regardless of whether Kirby created everything himself, Stan created everything himself, or something in between. The judge doesn't even appear to completely accept Lee's version of events. In her description of the creation of the FF, she writes that "Lee and Kirby co-created the Fantastic Four. At their first plotting conference, Lee and Kirby discussed ideas for the first issue. Kirby then produced the pencil drawings for the issue." That certainly doesn't gibe with Lee's version of events... if anything, it sounds more like Evanier's scenario.
Aug 1 11 2:13 PM
BillyBatson4360 wrote: It seems we have two sides here talking past each other.One side is talking about the finer points of law - which as many on this same side will admit, does not get into what is "fair" or "morally right," but what is the letter of the law.The other side is very concerned with what is "fair" or "morally right." Because they feel Stan Lee has lied or misrepresented the amount of creative input he had, the fine points of the law don't matter and the Kirby family should win the case because the other side is "cheating."I am perfectly willing to concede that Stan Lee may be lying or exaggerating in certain accounts. But I also know that Jack Kirby lied or exaggerated in statements he made as well.I was exchanging online messages last week with someone who had interviewed Jack towards the end of his life. This interviewer was not really knowledgeable about comic book history and so had taken everything Jack told him at face value. One of the things, he related was that Jack claimed to have created both Captain America and the Shield, and created both out of his anger and resentment to the Nazi movement.There had been no mention of Joe Simon's participation in (and I would say PRIMARY contribution to) Captain America and the statement about the Shield was a double lie. Kirby had nothing to do with the character's creation - and when he was involved (again, with Joe Simon) in the character's revamp, the main villains were Communists, not Nazis.I realize the nature of this exchange may raise credibility issues with those championing Kirby's cause. If interested, here's a link to the exchange: Captain America On Screen. As with the statements to the LOC from the owner of Ditko art, I feel the statements attributed to Kirby are definitely in line with many other statements Kirby made late in life in published interviews and accounts where he exaggerated his own accomplishments and downplayed or denied the input of his co-creators.I do know this - there is a certifiable difference between the comic books Jack Kirby created by himself and those he created in collaboration with Stan Lee. This leads me to the independent conclusion that Lee made a contribution to the creation and development of those characters. There was also a continuity in style on those books after Kirby left Marvel - indicating that Lee, somewhat like Walt Disney, was able to shape the creative tone and style of the Marvel line in his editorial capacity.I also know from my own experience as a work-for-hire creative type that creation is not the issue. Everything I do I pretty much create 100% on my own with zero creative input from my clients, but because I was given the general assignment, they are the owners of that creativity.
Posts: 899
Aug 1 11 2:26 PM
alexarkadin wrote:The key to the ruling is if Kirby created characters and plots on spec. I'm not saying this, it's the judge who says it over and over again. She reasons that because Lee created the characters and plots before ever speaking to Kirby nothing he did was done on spec. Everything else stems from that understanding based on Lee's testimony.
Posts: 1754
Aug 1 11 3:15 PM
Registered Member
alexarkadin wrote: I wouldn't be so sure Toberoff doesn't agree with me (wink).The key to the ruling is if Kirby created characters and plots on spec. I'm not saying this, it's the judge who says it over and over again. She reasons that because Lee created the characters and plots before ever speaking to Kirby nothing he did was done on spec. Everything else stems from that understanding based on Lee's testimony. Lee created the Fantastic Four alone, wrote an outline, and then gave it to Kirby to draw. Anything Kirby added (and Lee mentions nothing which is given a name) was thus done after Lee had created and set in motion the basic characters, and plot.
Aug 1 11 3:38 PM
Posts: 2776
Aug 1 11 4:07 PM
Golden Age
kirbyfanatic wrote:That's the tragedy: that Kirby could have played a major role in the creation of those characters, but loses on the basis of work for hire.
Aug 1 11 4:22 PM
sfcityduck wrote:Is your intent here to argue that this decision vindicates those who say that Kirby had no role in creating Marvel's characters?
Posts: 5920
Aug 1 11 4:56 PM
BillyBatson4360 wrote:First off, even in this suit, Lee freely admits that Jack created the Silver Surfer all by himself.
BillyBatson4360 wrote: kirbyfanatic wrote: That's the tragedy: that Kirby could have played a major role in the creation of those characters, but loses on the basis of work for hire.And it was a real tragedy that Bill Finger never participated in the massive profits generated by the huge contributions he made to the Batman mythos. And a real tragedy that Siegel & Shuster made only a small fraction of the billions of dollars their Superman character has generated. And a real tragedy that Otto Messmer never received a fair share of the money generated by Felix the Cat. And a real tragedy that Seymour Reit never got a nickel for his creation of the character Casper the Friendly Ghost. And a real tragedy that Vincent Van Gogh never got any real money for his paintings when today they changed hands for many millions of dollars. (Are you sensing a pattern here?)
kirbyfanatic wrote: That's the tragedy: that Kirby could have played a major role in the creation of those characters, but loses on the basis of work for hire.
Aug 1 11 4:59 PM
Posts: 3826
Aug 1 11 5:35 PM
kirbyfanatic wrote:I agree with Medieval Guy that Stan is a cocreator of the Silver Surfer. Unfortunately. I think a Kirby written version of the character would have been more interesting than the Hamlet on a surfboard character we got. Allen Smith
Aug 1 11 5:38 PM
Posts: 5411
Aug 1 11 6:04 PM
KirbyFan4ever wrote:The Surfer we saw in FF #48 - 77 WAS true to Kirby's concept of the character, it's only AFTER Stan's origin in SS #1 that we get a 180 degree change in who this character is.
Aug 1 11 6:08 PM
BillyBatson4360 wrote: It seems clear the judge agrees with what has always been the conventional wisdom: Jack & Stan co-created the Fantastic Four, co-created the Hulk, and co-created Thor.
Aug 1 11 6:27 PM
sfcityduck wrote:The Judge has voiced no opinion on that, and specifically disclaims making any findings regarding character creation. Instead, the Judge recognizes that for purposes of this motion that Marvel contends, and Kirby does not dispute, that Jack & Stan co-created FF and Hulk (I don't recall reading that as to Thor).
Posts: 10379
Aug 1 11 6:51 PM
Steve Bissette has been writing about the Jack Kirby Vs Marvel case and its wider implications, legally and morally. And in doing so has called on a boycott for anyone buying work based on anything created or co-created by Jack Kirby at Marvel.
Posts: 1897
Aug 1 11 7:25 PM
Fin Fang Foom wrote:Steve Bissette has been writing about the Jack Kirby Vs Marvel case and its wider implications, legally and morally. And in doing so has called on a boycott for anyone buying work based on anything created or co-created by Jack Kirby at Marvel. I think Bissette's heart is in the right place, I really do -- but A.) there are many more than just one creator who have been poorly treated by Marvel through the years, and B.) the further he gets into this, the more he begins to sound like a bit of a wing nut.
Share This