Showing posts with label jim shooter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jim shooter. Show all posts

Thursday, October 08, 2009

Milk That Yacht



Sheesh, how much SDCCI footage can you have that you're still rolling out interviews more than two months after it ended?


You have to wonder how relevant and up-to-date a two and a half month old interview can be. I don't know if there was some info that couldn't be made public until now, but, for crying out loud, scrap it and go with something new. Jonah's a great guy and all, but even he says during the interview that this was just announced and Shooter probably didn't have the scope of the project yet.

But I guess it helps fill out the page or something.


Be on the lookout on July 1st, 2010: from the SDCCI 2009 CBR yacht, the interview with John Layman on his reaction to the Gold Key news! The Monday before the convention? An SDCCI 2009 CBR yacht interview with Fabian Nicienza for his reaction, as well.

Monday, November 03, 2008

Jim Shooter: Taking The Blame Or Faking Humility?


In talking to friends and reading a few blogs, it seems people are crediting Jim Shooter with standing up and taking the blame for his run on Legion of Super-Heroes coming to an end.

Heck, even Shooter comes back to try to make sure people get that it is HIS fault:

“Anyway, upon reading the interview, I wonder now if people will focus on the things I said regarding Francis like he’s ‘going to be great someday, maybe one of the best of all time,’ ‘great designer,’ ‘incapable of drawing a dull picture,’ etc. or just think that I’m blaming him for the book’s demise. Read it again. I blame me."

That's obviously what Shooter wants you to come away thinking, but it isn't sincerely his position. Sure, he did say:

“But let’s focus on the real culprit – me. I guess what it really all comes down to is that my work wasn’t good enough to overcome all the small problems further down the line. "

People seem to stop reading that at, "my work wasn't good enough," and ignore the rest.

The man isn't saying his writing was the true blame, he's saying it wasn't good enough to make up for everyone else's screw ups. What screw ups?

Making himself the victim:
  • “I think it had more to do with their being pissed at me for complaining too much and too loudly – to DC people only, not to the media – about various glitches and screw-ups than anything else. DC has incentives for licensing of new characters. Super Lad could, potentially be the new Superxxx, and very licensable. Why reward a pain in the ass like me with extra money?"
  • “Sales of ‘The Legion of Super-Heroes’ aren’t great, but they’re a lot better than those of some of the titles they’re keeping. I think canceling the book is a graceful way of getting rid of me. I complain too much and too loudly.”
It's Manapul's fault:
  • “No, I didn’t begin to get in ‘everything I wanted.’ What saw print was not anywhere near what I imagined or what was called for in the scripts. Not even close."
  • "He works very hard and seems to care a lot – but that and a $1.85 gets you a cup of coffee. As soon as Francis groks what business he’s in – storytelling – as soon as he realizes that conveying the story and information clearly, at a glance, is first priority, he’ll be a contender."
It's Didio's fault:
  • “After delivering the first draft of the 16-issue plot, I was ordered by Dan DiDio to rewrite it – for free – to include the introduction of a young, male Super -- note how I’m avoiding using the word ‘Superboy’ -- as a Legionnaire."
It's everyone but Livesay & Wands at fault:
  • “Inker Livesay and letterer Steve Wands did their jobs well, no problems there, but as for the rest of us, if we had done our jobs right, if the story had been good enough, if the story had been told well, if the coloring hadn’t been murky, if the covers hadn’t been weak, if there hadn’t been so many production mistakes, if there had been more promotion, if there had been enough of a buzz, if we’d been allowed to have a character with that Super ‘S,’ maybe we could have succeeded."
Look in that last one, in particular. In his list of things that actually needed to improve, where is anything about his writing? You can argue "enough of a buzz" could hinge on his writing a buzzworthy story, but I don't believe that is how he meant it. No, when the man lists actual faults, he lists none of his own.

If you believe the rumors about Chuck Dixon's firing (mapped out far in advance, refused to change when editorial demanded), it looks like we might have an epidemic breaking out with old school writers employed during the new school of comic book synergistic storytelling. That Jim Shooter plotted out 16 issues ahead can be seen as admirable. Thinking that he deserved extra pay for having to change things when his work-for-hire employer gave feedback, however, is not.

That he stands up for his right to licensing fees shows courage. That, from appearances, he was expecting licensing fees for a character that editorial pretty much handed to him and asked to have inserted shows avarice.

Anyone can say "I'm sorry" or "my bad". Shooter is saying it is his fault, but he's showing us with every other statement that he believes it to be anyone else's error but his own.