but property of warner brothers


This is old news actually that I commented on on Twitter when it blew up a few days ago. They reworded the vendor qualifications months ago because of an incident in Nashville where a vendor went berserk on several Creation employees when they asked the guy to take down his Supernatural Monopoly games which Creation sells also. The wording on what is allowed is now crap because of this one asshole who wasn’t used to selling at Creation. Basically, it boils down to this: Creation wants to be the only one selling licensed Supernatural merchandise (with the except of ConQuest Journals for reasons I won’t go into). This affects a few vendors that bring licensed Supernatural merch to sell, but they are mostly people that are not on what we affectionately call the #vendorsquad (the few of us that follow Creation to almost all Supernatural Creation shows).

Creation also doesn’t want unlicensed merch at their shows, meaning rip off merchandise with photorealistic faces on it. Again, at Nashville, there were several instances of vendors printing off fanart and other various images online and just slapping it on easily made merchandise. Other cons are FULL OF THIS STUFF even when they, too, have told their vendors not to bring it. Other con companies care less because they themselves generally aren’t licensed for direct sell like Creation is. Creation, to protect its license (because booths are sometimes checked by the studio), heavily screens and enforces their rules, which protect copyright infringement and Warner Brothers’ intellectual property.

I’m an independent artist. I technically fall under “unlicensed craft products”, but what they really mean is stuff with photorealistic images of the characters and their names. No one can put Dean, Sam, Cas, etc on their stuff in any way, shape, or form. This, however, leaves some leeway in the form of minimalism like with Atomic Bombshell’s pillows, or the Mad Hatter Designs’ posters. It also presents leeway on things that Supernatural itself has borrowed from like existing lore irl. Creation has the final say on these things tho. Normally, when something is questionable, Creation just asks you to remove it and there is usually no fuss. You are asking for a seat at their table and you must play by the rules.

My stuff is completely compliant. If it isn’t, then I don’t bring it and sell it online only instead. Independent artists are fine for the most part. I myself am booked up until Hawaii atm. My stuff has been fully inspected by almost every member of Creation and the studio. I don’t have any issues! Basically, Creation wants vendors that bring merchandise that isn’t in direct competition with theirs, that doesn’t violate copyright on the studio or other artists, and that these vendors stay at their booths for the entire course of the con. I hope this answers the questions and clears the confusion!

Why Are Female Superheroes Always Being Nerfed in Movies?

(via Urban Dictionary) 

I tend to believe (or at least try to believe) that most people’s expressions don’t originate from a place of bad intention. I don’t think most screenwriters or directors surreptitiously conspire to make female audience members feel as though they are lesser. But I also recognize that the resonance of cultural/societal bias has reverberating strength so, whether the offense be deliberate or subconscious, it deserves to be discussed if it seems palpable. To me, it’s an undeniable truth that when women are in possession of power in fiction, they are far more likely to be depicted as being out of control of it and/or far less confident in it than male peers. Because of this, they tend to the get the shaft and become less integral as a result which I believe sends a very bad message. So please, don’t take this post as some incendiary call to arms or indictment of anyone, I just want to share some observations. I’m still a fan, I’m still going to be seeing these movies and there are still lots of things I still like about them. 

This whole thing occurred to me, for possibly the billionth time, when I was watching a clip from Captain America: Civil War. A bevy of Avengers charge at Bucky Barnes, Tony gets to catch a bullet before being smacked down and T’Challa gets right back up again after taking a few hits, meanwhile, Sharon Carter gets flipped into table and Natasha gets subdued by simple strangulation. It cuts deeper seeing ‘Tasha be made such a fool by him because A) she has a long history of being exceptionally formidable in the comics (particularly against Bucky- see below) and B) this is the second time this has happened. Like the last time, she straddled him and, like last time, she’s tapped in a fraction of a second. Also, take note, a lot of her lead-in is dependent upon Sharon’s diversion. Look at the way a de-suited Tony so confidently smacks Bucky when, really, he’s the one of the crew (maybe above Sharon) with the least melee experience. Logically, his attack should’ve been the easiest to subvert even with a bullet-blocking hand, it’s as though 2 women=1 unarmed Iron Man.

Keep reading

Thoughts on "GAMERA"

The proof of concept for the new Gamera production dropped earlier today at NYCC. Let it be known, first and foremost, but I absolutely did not expect this to ever really happen. I was fairly certain that Gamera was essentially considered a dead property, and that Kadokawa had no interest in competing with both Warner Brothers and Toho in what is by now probably considered a sufficiently cornered market.
But surprise me they did, and with a fairly impressive and pretty damn cool “pilot film” (which is a fancy way of saying that this is not actually a trailer, but a concept piece not unlike the “destroyer of worlds” Godzilla trailer from a few years ago).
Yes, it’s a fairly impressive “trailer” and it is even more impressive that they showed the thing off at New York Comic Con. I like the basic concept too: giant monsters are a fact of life in this version of Japan, and a young man grows up amongst the chaos. Fascinatingly, it appears as though his father put him on some sort of “Monster Watchers” path, where he treated life-or-death struggles with a kind of flippancy that involved getting extra video game time if his son could outrun the murderous hell-bat behind him. The boy seems to have inherited his father’s fearlessness, and apparently decided that Gamera is the monster worth observing (as implied by the narration and the imagery of the binoculars).
The Gyaos are appropriately gruesome and bizarre, and the new monster (which may not even be in the final film) is pretty strange and cool - appropriate for a “Super Monster.” And Gamera himself is thickly built, inelegant, and ferocious, although a hint of character can be seen in his resolve to destroy the Gyaos.

The big ticket item is, of course, the choice to use all CGI in this trailer, and presumably in the actual production. It raises more than a few eyebrows, especially with many filmmakers in Japan pushing hard for a return to classic tokusatsu effects. It’s interesting to consider that this new Gamera may have been produced with a mind to directly compete with Legendary’s Godzilla rather than Toho’s SHIN GOJIRA, which, according to Higuchi, will be “hybrid effects” ala his work with ATTACK ON TITAN.
The point that I personally want to emphasize is, according to the reaction online, people do seem to be wowed by the trailer, and appropriately so: it’s very energetic and pretty to look at. But it could hardly be called “realistic.” If you were to ask the average moviegoer why they’d prefer CG to classic tokusatsu, they would probably say “because it’s more realistic.”
This is a fallacy, of course. If films like AGE OF ULTRON and JURASSIC WORLD, TRANSFORMERS, and THE HOBBIT prove anything, it’s that the notion of audiences wanting “realism” is laughably untrue.
What they want is for the film to look EXPENSIVE.
Big crazy shots that would be almost impossible with totally practical effects, as well as outrageously fast-moving action and a screen that is crammed with as many digital effects as possible can be very cool visually, but they’re hardly ever realistic. The majority of AGE OF ULTRON is cartoonishly over-the-top, and the titular character, while entertaining and expressive, is just a really shiny cartoon with no weight or presence in the world around him. “Realistic” he is not.
Now let me make something absolutely clear: I LIKE CGI. I LIKE IT A LOT. I think some really impressive things can be done with CGI, and even then, it doesn’t HAVE to look “realistic” if that’s what you’re going for. GODZILLA 2014 has some of the best CGI and rendering in recent memory, because Edwards knows how to composite a shot and integrate CG into it. And FURY ROAD uses CGI that I don’t think most people are even aware of.
What I’m not crazy about is this race-to-the-bottom, fast-food, dissolution-of-pre-production, fix-it-all-in-post mentality that is gripping the film industry. And I don’t want to see the Japanese film industry, which prides itself on tokusatsu, fall victim to this just so it’s movies can look more expensive.

But if it’s what the masses want, I guess they’re no fighting it.
Nifty turtle, though. More kaiju is ALWAYS good.