Junk Bar
Moderators: Scott McCloud, Moderators
-
- Frequent Poster
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2002 6:28 am
- Location: Portland, Oregon
- Contact:
Junk Bar
Maybe it's a little early yet to kick this off, but I just wanted to say already that the fourth panel just cracks me up.
It's the expression on "Jimmy's" face, and the way he's fiendishly holding his bright yellow bag of M&Ms. It's the way that "Frank" is nursing his Snickers like an infant gumming a favorite toy. Throw in a little bit of profanity and you've got a scene so bizarre that it tickles my funny bone every time I see it.
I don't want to jinx it, but so far this is a great way to herald in the new series of improvs.
It's the expression on "Jimmy's" face, and the way he's fiendishly holding his bright yellow bag of M&Ms. It's the way that "Frank" is nursing his Snickers like an infant gumming a favorite toy. Throw in a little bit of profanity and you've got a scene so bizarre that it tickles my funny bone every time I see it.
I don't want to jinx it, but so far this is a great way to herald in the new series of improvs.
Colors and background
Too early? Don't we all enjoy speculations more than anything else..
I found the coloring as well as the background extremely successfull. That's why the fourth panel is so funny, don't you think? You get the idea of smoky, somewhat filthy, regular local bar and a regular joe ordering his regular booze.
The scene could be from a bizarro world where alcohol is forbidden but chocolate not. Matriarchal society, that is. Just kidding But seriously, I bet the pint is full of hot chocolate.
-Yuzaa
I found the coloring as well as the background extremely successfull. That's why the fourth panel is so funny, don't you think? You get the idea of smoky, somewhat filthy, regular local bar and a regular joe ordering his regular booze.
The scene could be from a bizarro world where alcohol is forbidden but chocolate not. Matriarchal society, that is. Just kidding But seriously, I bet the pint is full of hot chocolate.
-Yuzaa
-
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2002 4:58 pm
- Location: Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy
Is it just me?
Did Frank turn into Richard Nixon in panel 5?
"I'm here to do some card tricks and fall way short on the yardstick of your love."
-
- The one and only
- Posts: 293
- Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 7:00 pm
- Contact:
Yea, it's all choices
That's funny. Frank keeps on complaining about choices.. Yet, he's not satisfied with Snickers but needs another brand. Poor, sad bar junkie.
-
- Frequent Poster
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2002 6:28 am
- Location: Portland, Oregon
- Contact:
Answer me these questions... two.
This comic brings up a certain legal issue that I've been wondering about for a long time. Well a couple, actually. I'm hoping that, as a long-time comic veteran, Scott would know the answers, or maybe there's some lawyers out there.
So what is the deal with appropriating logos and placing them in your comics? Is that copy-write infringement, or a trade-mark violation, or whatever, and could that get you into trouble? You see it all the time in films, comics, etc.: they choose to replace recognizable brand names with similar-looking knock offs so as to disassociate with the real products. If you play any song in a movie, even if it's in the background on a documentary, you have to pay royalties to somebody. (Unless it's one of those "public domain" things.) What are the legal ramifications of creating comics which represent the world as it actually exists, full of recognizable logos and symbols?
And that segues into another similar question. What could the fallout be from using an actual person's likeness in a comic--not as a fictional character, but as themselves. I'm thinking particularly in a context that the individual might not necessarily be interested in seeing themself appear. For instance let's suppose, hypothetically, that a certain infamously outspoken writer/comic enthusiast appeared as a featured guest at an event, near the end of which he berrated you in front of a couple hundred people. Now supposing you wanted to write a comic about that event and publish it in some form or another. Could that outspoken writer sue you for slander or demand royalties for use of his face or anything? I know with newspapers and such, there's the libel laws which basically state that you can't be sued for libel if everything you print is true. So if you wrote the comic just as it happened would you be untouchable? Or do different laws apply in this case?
So what is the deal with appropriating logos and placing them in your comics? Is that copy-write infringement, or a trade-mark violation, or whatever, and could that get you into trouble? You see it all the time in films, comics, etc.: they choose to replace recognizable brand names with similar-looking knock offs so as to disassociate with the real products. If you play any song in a movie, even if it's in the background on a documentary, you have to pay royalties to somebody. (Unless it's one of those "public domain" things.) What are the legal ramifications of creating comics which represent the world as it actually exists, full of recognizable logos and symbols?
And that segues into another similar question. What could the fallout be from using an actual person's likeness in a comic--not as a fictional character, but as themselves. I'm thinking particularly in a context that the individual might not necessarily be interested in seeing themself appear. For instance let's suppose, hypothetically, that a certain infamously outspoken writer/comic enthusiast appeared as a featured guest at an event, near the end of which he berrated you in front of a couple hundred people. Now supposing you wanted to write a comic about that event and publish it in some form or another. Could that outspoken writer sue you for slander or demand royalties for use of his face or anything? I know with newspapers and such, there's the libel laws which basically state that you can't be sued for libel if everything you print is true. So if you wrote the comic just as it happened would you be untouchable? Or do different laws apply in this case?
-
- Understands reinventing
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2002 2:00 pm
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
- Contact:
Here is what I know ... not being a lawyer or Scott, but being a graphic designer who has had the copy-RIGHT lecture at the begining of every class I took.
You are right about the possiblity about legal issues about Scott's comic using corporate logos, brands and design. Of course, Scott could have gotten premision from these companies before making this comic. At that point he would have to abide by whatever agreement met with that permision (usualy a copyright/trademark notice below the comic and an agreement that their products would not be used in a way that would be demeaning or misrepresent the brands). There is also the rare chance that these companies could have contacted Scott for "product placement". That tends to happen a lot in movies. Somehow, I doubt that either of these are true in this situation.
However, this is where we get into the editorial and artistic part of the discussion. There is a curtaint amount of first amendment rights that are given to the artist when it deals with public figures. You see this use in political cartoons in the newspapers. Geogre Bush just basicly has to eat his discontent over the hundreds of thousands of editorial cartoons drawn with him in it. So, if this writer/comic pissed you off, or just said something you disagree with, you can use this public figure in an editorial. Make sure it is a well thought-out opinion that is clear in the comic, not just mocking or vendictive. You will also see larger public figures in not just editorial usage, like the President, in comics and comic books. I can not tell you how many time I saw Bill Clinton in comic books when he was in office. Since these people are in the public eye, you can use their image as long as you are not making money off of their sole use. You can have David Letterman make a guest appearance in your comic without worrying, however if you want to make a Letterman comic, you need his permision and a license to use his likeness in your product (much like the KISS comics).
This can be used for products, to a point. I remember a lawsuit that Mattel had against an artist using Barbies in his art. The judge ruled that the artist was not violating trademark law with his Barbie art because Mattel was unable to provide sufficient proof that his art created confusion among customers over Barbie's true nature as a child's toy, or that his product constituted a "commercial" rather than "expressive" use of the Barbie doll. However, this does not mean you can go ahead and exploit various commerical products and brands. Just be very carefull in your use.
I hope this answers your questions.
You are right about the possiblity about legal issues about Scott's comic using corporate logos, brands and design. Of course, Scott could have gotten premision from these companies before making this comic. At that point he would have to abide by whatever agreement met with that permision (usualy a copyright/trademark notice below the comic and an agreement that their products would not be used in a way that would be demeaning or misrepresent the brands). There is also the rare chance that these companies could have contacted Scott for "product placement". That tends to happen a lot in movies. Somehow, I doubt that either of these are true in this situation.
However, this is where we get into the editorial and artistic part of the discussion. There is a curtaint amount of first amendment rights that are given to the artist when it deals with public figures. You see this use in political cartoons in the newspapers. Geogre Bush just basicly has to eat his discontent over the hundreds of thousands of editorial cartoons drawn with him in it. So, if this writer/comic pissed you off, or just said something you disagree with, you can use this public figure in an editorial. Make sure it is a well thought-out opinion that is clear in the comic, not just mocking or vendictive. You will also see larger public figures in not just editorial usage, like the President, in comics and comic books. I can not tell you how many time I saw Bill Clinton in comic books when he was in office. Since these people are in the public eye, you can use their image as long as you are not making money off of their sole use. You can have David Letterman make a guest appearance in your comic without worrying, however if you want to make a Letterman comic, you need his permision and a license to use his likeness in your product (much like the KISS comics).
This can be used for products, to a point. I remember a lawsuit that Mattel had against an artist using Barbies in his art. The judge ruled that the artist was not violating trademark law with his Barbie art because Mattel was unable to provide sufficient proof that his art created confusion among customers over Barbie's true nature as a child's toy, or that his product constituted a "commercial" rather than "expressive" use of the Barbie doll. However, this does not mean you can go ahead and exploit various commerical products and brands. Just be very carefull in your use.
I hope this answers your questions.
Junk Bar
Is the whole "Kyle Baker" feel to the art just me? Anyway, Kyle's one of my favorites in the field. The range of expression conveyed when the eyes are scrunched shut is eclipsed only the shock when the eyes are depicted as wide, wide open. Maybe it is just me.
Glad to see the Hershey's syrup in the latest panel, I was getting worried that Scott had picked up a coporate sponsor in Mars...
Glad to see the Hershey's syrup in the latest panel, I was getting worried that Scott had picked up a coporate sponsor in Mars...
- Greg Stephens
- Forum Founder
- Posts: 3862
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 7:00 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
- Contact:
-
- The one and only
- Posts: 293
- Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 7:00 pm
- Contact:
[before we proceed, I want to say that I was relieved to confirm via email with chris lungren that I was *not* the "infamously outspoken writer/comic enthusiast" mentioned in his post!]
Splitrock probably has it right about the unconscious Kyle Baker influence, though I hadn't noticed it until now.
As it happens, I got to see Kyle in San Diego this year. He had a giant Monitor on his table which he'd carried *by hand* from the Hyatt. My hands hurt just thinking about it.
Kyle's brilliant and wickedly funny work is on display <a href="http://www.kylebaker.com">here.</a>
Splitrock probably has it right about the unconscious Kyle Baker influence, though I hadn't noticed it until now.
As it happens, I got to see Kyle in San Diego this year. He had a giant Monitor on his table which he'd carried *by hand* from the Hyatt. My hands hurt just thinking about it.
Kyle's brilliant and wickedly funny work is on display <a href="http://www.kylebaker.com">here.</a>
-
- Reinvents understanding
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 4:47 pm
- Location: The Riptania Sky-Palace in da beauuuuuutiful Bronx.
- Contact:
Actually, in many movies, the company who owns the brand-name in question usually pays the studio for the afore mentioned product placement. It's free advertising. When a character in a movie blantantly drinks a can of Pepsi, it's usually because Pepsico ponied up some cash to the studio to display their product...and not have said character drinking a Coke instead. So, it follows that Hershey's, Nestle's, Mars, etc. should be paying Scott for featuring their products. That is if they're not already. , ,Scott.So what is the deal with appropriating logos and placing them in your comics? Is that copy-write infringement, or a trade-mark violation, or whatever, and could that get you into trouble? You see it all the time in films, comics, etc.: they choose to replace recognizable brand names with similar-looking knock offs so as to disassociate with the real products. If you play any song in a movie, even if it's in the background on a documentary, you have to pay royalties to somebody. (Unless it's one of those "public domain" things.) What are the legal ramifications of creating comics which represent the world as it actually exists, full of recognizable logos and symbols?
Of course, Scott could have gone the MAD magazine route, and had the characters eating W&Ws, Snackers, Greeses, and Himshey's.
Personally, I prefer good ol' Fox's U-bet. As my father always says, "Ya can't make a good egg cream without it."Glad to see the Hershey's syrup in the latest panel
What about chocolate-covered pretzels?I know from experimence that beer and chocolate don't go well together.
"Park the beers, and grab the smiles. It's flight time." - LtCdr. J. Robert "Bobby" Stone, USN (R.I.P.)
-
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Thu May 29, 2003 1:05 am
- Location: Atlanta
Re: Hershey
So -- no Chocolate Stout for you, then, eh? Shame, really -- there are quite a few good examples available.Anonymous wrote:Yeah, the Hershey's was a nice touch...I had been wondering what they were drinking. I know from experimence that beer and chocolate don't go well together.
Many folks find that the chocolate flavor sets nicely against the bitterness of an Imperial-style stout (myself, I find them to be like Rauchbiers in that the first one is exquisite beyond compare, the second one is okay, and after the third one you curse the very concept and swear to avoid them forever).
- Greg Stephens
- Forum Founder
- Posts: 3862
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 7:00 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
- Contact:
Panel placement
Hm. Some panels go across, and some go down. Now, is it just me or is there a method to the madness? If a panel has one character in it, it's placed horizontally, but if there's two characters, then it's placed vertically (though panel 8's kind of in-between- 1 and 1/2 characters showing, placed to the right of the previous one). What happens when there are three characters in panel?
Good morning! That's a nice tnetennba.
-
- Consistant Poster
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 7:00 pm
- Location: MA
- Contact:
Sometimes the companies are weird about it though. I had a play produced at my school recently which included "The Poland Spring Guy" as a prominent character. The costume department contacted Poland Spring to see if they'd be willing to donate a uniform to the production. They're answer was pretty much "Hell no!" unless we paid them huge amounts of money in liscensing fees. They expected us to pay them for the priviledge of providing them with free advertising. The costumers went ahead and made a uniform themselves (including spiffy Poland Spring boxer shorts!). Since it was just an academic production, it wasn't really a concern. But in all future performances, I'll be changing the character to "The Polar Spring Guy."Rip Tanion wrote:Actually, in many movies, the company who owns the brand-name in question usually pays the studio for the afore mentioned product placement. It's free advertising.
-
- Frequent Poster
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2002 6:28 am
- Location: Portland, Oregon
- Contact:
You ask a silly question, you get...
Diagonal, baby!Greg Stephens wrote:If a panel has one character in it, it's placed horizontally, but if there's two characters, then it's placed vertically. What happens when there are three characters in panel?
Mr. Cinnamon Altoids
Why do I get get the feeling our young bespectacled hipster is going to piss off the two old timers? Oh please let there be a bar fight! I luv violence in comics. I hope the hipster get his ass kicked!
-
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2002 4:58 pm
- Location: Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy
Re: Mr. Cinnamon Altoids
Guff wrote:Oh please let there be a bar fight! I luv violence in comics.
Why do I get the sneaky suspicion that Scott was leading up to this very bad pun?
"I'm here to do some card tricks and fall way short on the yardstick of your love."
Facial resemblance...
Nixon? I dunno. Aside from the pointy nose he kinda looks like James Coburn to me. Right down to the toothy smile with the deeply gouged lines surrounding it.Scott McCloud wrote:Yeah, I'm having trouble keeping the Nixon thing under control.
Greg O.
- Greg Stephens
- Forum Founder
- Posts: 3862
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 7:00 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, California, USA
- Contact:
Oop! The guy on my other right!
That's the one people think looks like Nixon? Wow. I don't get that vibe at all. To me he looks more like a hybridization of Fred Flintstone and Tony Soprano. Either way, glad to know I'm not the only one seeing some Coburn in Jimmy.Greg Stephens wrote:Yeah, the guy on the left looks like Colburn, but that's Jimmy. The guy on the right- Frank- is the one who's looking a bit Nixon-ish.
Greg O.
-
- Reinvents understanding
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 4:47 pm
- Location: The Riptania Sky-Palace in da beauuuuuutiful Bronx.
- Contact:
Yeah, the Colburn is pretty obvious.
But I don't really see Frank looking like Nixon. Nixon's nose was not bulbous like Frank's. It was more needle like, kind of like Bob Hope's. Frank reminds me more of Jack Webb after a few years of binge junk food consumtion, and hair loss.
"You're pretty high and far out. What kind of kick are you on, son?"
-Sgt. Joe Friday, L.A.P.D. (badge 714)
But I don't really see Frank looking like Nixon. Nixon's nose was not bulbous like Frank's. It was more needle like, kind of like Bob Hope's. Frank reminds me more of Jack Webb after a few years of binge junk food consumtion, and hair loss.
"You're pretty high and far out. What kind of kick are you on, son?"
-Sgt. Joe Friday, L.A.P.D. (badge 714)
"Park the beers, and grab the smiles. It's flight time." - LtCdr. J. Robert "Bobby" Stone, USN (R.I.P.)