Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Decius
Oct 14, 2005

Ramrod XTreme

David Heinrich posted:

Getting up in arms about one thing because it's easy to do so but shying away from the acknowledgement of other similar things has always bothered me in that sense. It's the classic picture of someone saying that it's disgusting that a clothing company could use child labor, or abuse the third world for profit, posted from an iPhone 7.

This veers very near the "no ethical consumption under Capitalism" or the even older "go over there (USSR/GDR) if you don't like it here". Criticising something doesn't mean you have to leave the system to do so. Expecting someone to either embrace every aspect of a system, regardless how bad or make all the stuff you use by yourself isn't a reasonable reaction. Denying yourself the means for spreading your message for some dubious moral high ground seems very shortsighted.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Blockhouse
Sep 7, 2014

You Win!
Like I said in the main thread I agree with no ethical consumption under Capitalism to a degree but I believe everyone has a personal line in the sand and it's important that we have the delineation for when you just morally can't support something anymore.

It's up to every individual where their particular limit is and it turns out this is over a lot of people's.

Blade Runner
Aug 14, 2015

Uncle Boogeyman posted:

I mean, presumably you own a smartphone and/or a computer, so are you saying you yourself are not allowed to find any company's labor practices disgusting? Or do you think that maybe isn't the best argument?

I post through a complex system of pulleys and levers

But no, what I'm saying is that it feels like a pretty hollow thing to criticize Marvel for taking advertising money from one company simply because it owns a PMC subsidiary which does things that are inherently evil while sort of shrugging and saying "Well what can ya do" at best when confronted with another company that has far more closely and directly partnered with Marvel doing things that are(In my personal opinion, of course.)pretty much just as bad. I'm primarily talking about the outrage around this weirding me out; do you sincerely think that anyone would've even commented much on it if they'd announced they were coming out with a comic where Hulk eats some candy bars like Popeye downing spinach to beat up the Abomination? And isn't that sort of hyperfocus on the political accompaniments that go with tearing into a defense contractor over any corporation which just pisses on regulations and fucks people over a little hypocritical, when put into the lens of "associating with people who do hosed up things"? I'm not trying to put myself above anyone. I consume a ton of luxury goods and participate in lovely capitalism stuff more than even a normal person, in all likelihood. That's why I'm saying that I just can't really bring myself to find the partnership with Grumman so much more disgusting than their partnership with Coca Cola that I don't really feel like anything should be done about it. I'm saying that, if you're going to take a moral high ground sort of position with regards to advertising like that, you should do it with everything, not just selectively say that one company is bad for owning a PMC which does awful things(Though it definitely is bad for that.)and cannot be associated with, while another company is so ubiquitous that their own reprehensible acts just get a pass because there's nothing that can be done and Disney would sooner have literally nobody buying a single comic than lose a cent of that Coca Cola money.

e: I can certainly accept that my line in the sand relative to capitalism is just different from other people's, and I'm willing to accept more awful acts than other people might be to be able to go into a grocery store and buy Wheaties in my pajamas. I'm also not advocating leaving the system(The iPhone analogy came up after an argument I got into with a friend about her claiming that a shirt I was wearing was made from child labor because of where I'd purchased it, me pointing out that she'd thrown a perfectly functioning iPhone 6 in the trash to get the 7 a couple of weeks before, etc. It was entirely anecdotal, and probably not entirely relevant, so I apologize for that.), I'm just saying that to criticize one it only feels proper to criticize another doing the same thing. If you're going to say that it's a moral wrong to advertise for Grumman, I feel like you also need to say it's wrong to advertise for Coca Cola, and apply the same sort of thrust to your push against Marvel for either of these things.

Blade Runner fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Oct 7, 2017

site
Apr 6, 2007

Trans pride, Worldwide
Bitch

David Heinrich posted:

I think you're taking my statements personally, when that isn't how they're meant. I'm not saying you, personally, are cool with the acts of these mega corporations. I'm saying that the vast majority of people, comic readers among them, cannot seem to rouse themselves to give a gently caress; and in that same sense, you didn't see the Superbowl and you don't watch Network TV, but quite a lot of people do. Grumman also does innocuous aerospace stuff with NASA; honestly, it seems like the fact that it just plain hasn't needed good PR because it doesn't make consumer products is loving it over far more than its actual actions as a company. Getting up in arms about one thing because it's easy to do so but shying away from the acknowledgement of other similar things has always bothered me in that sense. It's the classic picture of someone saying that it's disgusting that a clothing company could use child labor, or abuse the third world for profit, posted from an iPhone 7.

Okay yeah i can agree with that up to a point. I think you're right that there's a level of dissociation as to "how the sausage gets made" for most people, but i think there are lots of context that need to be taken into account for that as well. Poor people, like myself, shop at walmart cuz it's cheap even though we may be aware of their horrible business practices. As mentioned before, it's hard not to end up buying products from co's like Nestlé cuz they own so many subsidiaries. I am most likely posting on a tablet made from near slave labor and tbh i doubt you could find a phone or tablet that isn't. Am ia hypocrite. Yes. Would i look for other options of i had financial ability? Also yes. The person who bus brand new phones every season cuz they're loaded and then complain about capitalism is a hypocrite by choice, people like me are hypocrites out of necessity.

Should we have the expectation that low income people pay more at the counter to be ethical, should we expect everybody to have perfect knowledge of who makes all of the thousands of products available before they can condemn shady and/or illegal business practices, should we expect people to love in empty apartments and communicate with carrier pidgins before we can express dismay?

There are levels of hypocrisy we just have to accept in this life, and i find the notion that that means we are unable to critique the system we are forced to participate in spurious

Uncle Boogeyman
Jul 22, 2007

David Heinrich posted:

I post through a complex system of pulleys and levers

But no, what I'm saying is that it feels like a pretty hollow thing to criticize Marvel for taking advertising money from one company simply because it owns a PMC subsidiary which does things that are inherently evil while sort of shrugging and saying "Well what can ya do" at best when confronted with another company that has far more closely and directly partnered with Marvel doing things that are(In my personal opinion, of course.)pretty much just as bad. I'm primarily talking about the outrage around this weirding me out; do you sincerely think that anyone would've even commented much on it if they'd announced they were coming out with a comic where Hulk eats some candy bars like Popeye downing spinach to beat up the Abomination? And isn't that sort of hyperfocus on the political accompaniments that go with tearing into a defense contractor over any corporation which just pisses on regulations and fucks people over a little hypocritical, when put into the lens of "associating with people who do hosed up things"? I'm not trying to put myself above anyone. I consume a ton of luxury goods and participate in lovely capitalism stuff more than even a normal person, in all likelihood. That's why I'm saying that I just can't really bring myself to find the partnership with Grumman so much more disgusting than their partnership with Coca Cola that I don't really feel like anything should be done about it. I'm saying that, if you're going to take a moral high ground sort of position with regards to advertising like that, you should do it with everything, not just selectively say that one company is bad for owning a PMC which does awful things(Though it definitely is bad for that.)and cannot be associated with, while another company is so ubiquitous that their own reprehensible acts just get a pass because there's nothing that can be done and Disney would sooner have literally nobody buying a single comic than lose a cent of that Coca Cola money.

I mean the thing about all of these "but aren't you being hypocritical arguments" is that they seem to just be an excuse for inaction, i.e. because you determine someone's actions to be inconsistent, they should do nothing, because otherwise it's "hollow".

Sometimes you gotta pick your battles. And this one had a tangible result, even.

Blade Runner
Aug 14, 2015

Uncle Boogeyman posted:

I mean the thing about all of these "but aren't you being hypocritical arguments" is that they seem to just be an excuse for inaction, i.e. because you determine someone's actions to be inconsistent, they should do nothing, because otherwise it's "hollow".

Sometimes you gotta pick your battles. And this one had a tangible result, even.

Like I said, it was mostly just the sheer vitriolic outrage that surprised me. The "How could Marvel possibly partner with such an evil corporation?! They're abandoning their core values." When they've been partnered with Coca Cola for years is a patently nonsensical thing to say that just refuses to acknowledge that Marvel has always been this sort of company, in my eyes. If partnering with Grumman is too far for some people, I can accept that. What I can't accept, at least without a bit of an odd look, is that sort of disgust and surprise like it's just out of nowhere or somehow any different from what they've always done.

Uncle Boogeyman
Jul 22, 2007

David Heinrich posted:

Like I said, it was mostly just the sheer vitriolic outrage that surprised me. The "How could Marvel possibly partner with such an evil corporation?! They're abandoning their core values." When they've been partnered with Coca Cola for years is a patently nonsensical thing to say that just refuses to acknowledge that Marvel has always been this sort of company, in my eyes. If partnering with Grumman is too far for some people, I can accept that. What I can't accept, at least without a bit of an odd look, is that sort of disgust and surprise like it's just out of nowhere or somehow any different from what they've always done.

I mean I think part of the outrage being so intense this time is that people have been focusing more of a critical eye on Marvel lately in general as they've become more and more of an enormous media conglomerate and had more and more recent controversies (Ike Perlmutter being a huge Trump guy, Marvel saying diversity was killing its sales, etc).

Also I guess in general if you're using this Nestle argument to say "I think we should boycott Marvel because it works with Nestle," I think that's cool. But if you're using it to say "I don't think Northrup-Grumman is a big deal because Nestle is also bad," I don't find that as respectable a take.

I guess the simple way of boiling down how i feel about it is I'd rather see someone take a step in the right direction even if it's imperfect or not consistent across everything they do than see them do nothing.

Uncle Boogeyman fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Oct 7, 2017

Blade Runner
Aug 14, 2015

Uncle Boogeyman posted:

I mean I think part of the outrage being so intense this time is that people have been focusing more of a critical eye on Marvel lately in general as they've become more and more of an enormous media conglomerate and had more and more recent controversies (Ike Perlmutter being a huge Trump guy, Marvel saying diversity was killing its sales, etc).

Also I guess in general if you're using this Nestle argument to say "I think we should boycott Marvel because it works with Nestle," I think that's cool. But if you're using it to say "I don't think Northrup-Grumman is a big deal because Nestle is also bad," I don't find that as respectable a take.

I guess the simple way of boiling down how i feel about it is I'd rather see someone take a step in the right direction even if it's imperfect or not consistent across everything they do than see them do nothing.

Political affiliations notwithstanding, I couldn't help but sort of laugh about Perlmutter essentially using money gained from sales of comics making fun of Trump to donate to his campaign. The sheer audacity of it killed me.

As for the whole thing, I'm mostly saying that I feel it's necessary to acknowledge and keep in mind the other companies that Marvel partners with for their advertising before getting up in arms about this particular one. Taking a step in the right direction is good, but it needs to be acknowledged that it's a step in that direction. I can't bring myself to ever care about the actions of companies on a personal level to boycott because I'm a fuckman, but I definitely feel like if you're going to start scrutinizing Marvel for their advertising partners, stopping here is the wrong way to go with it. So it's the second one on a personal level, but the first one on the whole; I don't feel like I'm going to start really having the effort to care about any partnerships in advertising that Marvel is going to do. If someone does, and they want to start pushing against that, that's great; but they should also rail against other parts of that system doing the same thing, not act like the giant has been killed because his finger has been cut.

site
Apr 6, 2007

Trans pride, Worldwide
Bitch
Well again i think that's making a lot of assumptions in saying that the crowd that shut this down on Twitter aren't also decrying their other business practices

Because the people i saw criticizing it do. Quite often

And yes we realize this isn't gonna kill the beast, i dunno why you're assuming we think this did

BravestOfTheLamps
Oct 12, 2012

by FactsAreUseless
Lipstick Apathy
I just find it laughable at how people constantly criticize the partnership by mentioning how Tony Stark left arms dealing behind.

Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



BravestOfTheLamps posted:

I just find it laughable at how people constantly criticize the partnership by mentioning how Tony Stark left arms dealing behind.
What's funny about it? It's a major moment from a major Marvel Comics(tm) film which was widely seen and was tons of people's introduction to the character.

BravestOfTheLamps
Oct 12, 2012

by FactsAreUseless
Lipstick Apathy

Nessus posted:

What's funny about it? It's a major moment from a major Marvel Comics(tm) film which was widely seen and was tons of people's introduction to the character.

In the movie, which incidentally establishes the MCU, Tony Stark declares that he will no longer produce weapons since they fuel war and violence.

He then develops a new weapon, which he uses to fly to Afghanistan and kill Muslim insurgents.

The outrage isn't really because this partnership contradicts with the values that Iron Man represents. The outrage is that this partnership conforms with the values that Iron Man represents, and people are fervently denying this so that they can keep enjoying the Iron Man fantasy. Northrop-Grumman is completely correct: they are the reality of the Stark Industries dream.

BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Oct 7, 2017

Salacious Spy
May 29, 2010

Well the word got around they said this kid is insane, man
Banged in the mouth and now he's got AIDS, man

David Heinrich posted:

Like I said, it was mostly just the sheer vitriolic outrage that surprised me. The "How could Marvel possibly partner with such an evil corporation?! They're abandoning their core values." When they've been partnered with Coca Cola for years is a patently nonsensical thing to say that just refuses to acknowledge that Marvel has always been this sort of company, in my eyes. If partnering with Grumman is too far for some people, I can accept that. What I can't accept, at least without a bit of an odd look, is that sort of disgust and surprise like it's just out of nowhere or somehow any different from what they've always done.

This is my theory: Decades of discovering that Actually Even Seemingly Innocuous Corporations Are Nefarious Money Vampires has given the public a general cynicism and suspicion that every product or company ultimately represents cavalcades of unimaginable human suffering perpetrated by sociopathic profit hounds in business suits. As a result, most modern PR tends to be geared towards convincing people that a business isn't evil; buzzwords such as "locally sourced" "organic" "small batch" have mainly become attempts to signal that the company cares about the the way they do business and isn't trying to poison you, cut corners at the expense of the consumer's health, or outsource its production to third world child slaves. However, the extent to which the public acts on that suspicion seems to largely depend on image. As you say, Northrop-Grumman does not manufacture consumer products and thus hasn't needed to invest in PR. This, coupled with the mildly common usage of weapons contractors and war profiteers as vile Snidely Whiplash bastard villains in your Iron Mans and Metal Gears Solid and Calls of Duty and Die Hards and whatnot and the fact that Grumman does actually manufacture weapons to kill people in a very real and direct sense violently orients public opinion against them. Compare this to Nestle and Coca-Cola, who mostly only suffer drubbings in token news articles and documentaries, and who invest in the aforementioned apologist marketing ("Made with REAL cane sugar!!!") - this is where the cognitive dissonance comes from, I think. Most people will acknowledge the belief or suspicion that those companies are villainous meat grinders fed by human suffering but will not act against them to the same degree absent a greater spark.

Mr President
Nov 13, 2016

by Lowtax
So stupid that Marvel caved into mob mentality

Northrop Grumman provides good paying jobs to hardworking Americans and this deal would have helped encourage more young people into STEM school programs and more interest in technology but nope the losers of the internet are gonna have none of that! So a bunch of bullshit about “Marvel making deals with WEAPONS MANUFACTUERERS!” Gets thrown around and next thing you know a bunch of people who don’t know the defense industry from a hole in the wall wants to stick their two cents in to feel like some big hero. Guess what? your not a hero, at the end of the day nobody worth anything gives a poo poo and your still just an idiot.

So now that promoting science and engineering has been nixed we can get back to the important stuff like getting all excited about the latest diversity gimmick from the big two and pressuring publishers to make more characters gay or something so that you can feel good that you’ve trashed someone else’s favorite character. You people should be loving ashamed.

And now that fascist XO is gonna ban me again for exercising free speech. What the hell happened to the internet?

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

sexpig by night
Sep 8, 2011

by Azathoth

Mr President posted:

So stupid that Marvel caved into mob mentality

Northrop Grumman provides good paying jobs to hardworking Americans and this deal would have helped encourage more young people into STEM school programs and more interest in technology but nope the losers of the internet are gonna have none of that! So a bunch of bullshit about “Marvel making deals with WEAPONS MANUFACTUERERS!” Gets thrown around and next thing you know a bunch of people who don’t know the defense industry from a hole in the wall wants to stick their two cents in to feel like some big hero. Guess what? your not a hero, at the end of the day nobody worth anything gives a poo poo and your still just an idiot.

So now that promoting science and engineering has been nixed we can get back to the important stuff like getting all excited about the latest diversity gimmick from the big two and pressuring publishers to make more characters gay or something so that you can feel good that you’ve trashed someone else’s favorite character. You people should be loving ashamed.

And now that fascist XO is gonna ban me again for exercising free speech. What the hell happened to the internet?

sir the question was 'is this your handwriting'

jivjov
Sep 13, 2007

But how does it taste? Yummy!
Dinosaur Gum

Mr President posted:

So stupid that Marvel caved into mob mentality


And now that fascist XO is gonna ban me again for exercising free speech. What the hell happened to the internet?

Gonna pull two things out here

For your first sentence...this is literally how capitalism works. People vote with their dollars and vote with their reactions. This is the system working as intended.

As to the end...your right to free speech doesn't exist here. SA is not run by the federal government. You have the right to say whatever the rules of the venue allow you to.

Mr. Maltose
Feb 16, 2011

The Guffless Girlverine

Mr President posted:

So stupid that Marvel caved into mob mentality

Northrop Grumman provides good paying jobs to hardworking Americans and this deal would have helped encourage more young people into STEM school programs and more interest in technology but nope the losers of the internet are gonna have none of that! So a bunch of bullshit about “Marvel making deals with WEAPONS MANUFACTUERERS!” Gets thrown around and next thing you know a bunch of people who don’t know the defense industry from a hole in the wall wants to stick their two cents in to feel like some big hero. Guess what? your not a hero, at the end of the day nobody worth anything gives a poo poo and your still just an idiot.

So now that promoting science and engineering has been nixed we can get back to the important stuff like getting all excited about the latest diversity gimmick from the big two and pressuring publishers to make more characters gay or something so that you can feel good that you’ve trashed someone else’s favorite character. You people should be loving ashamed.

And now that fascist XO is gonna ban me again for exercising free speech. What the hell happened to the internet?

Gay relationships are cool and fun, unlike the military industrial complex. More comics trashing favorite characters by making them queer, please.

Mr President
Nov 13, 2016

by Lowtax

jivjov posted:

Gonna pull two things out here

For your first sentence...this is literally how capitalism works. People vote with their dollars and vote with their reactions. This is the system working as intended.

As to the end...your right to free speech doesn't exist here. SA is not run by the federal government. You have the right to say whatever the rules of the venue allow you to.

People vote with their dollars alright that’s why marvel sales are in the toilet for pushing their diversity gimmick agenda instead of focusing on good stories!

I’m well within the rules of SA but some folks here in BSS don’t like nonconformists who don’t want to spend all hours of the day talking about how totally awesome it is that Squirel Girl has trans friends and how much of a scumbag Mark Millar is

Blockhouse
Sep 7, 2014

You Win!
God, you have to be a joke account, right? If you're not a joke account then you're a joke person and I don't know which is real anymore.

Lurdiak
Feb 26, 2006

I believe in a universe that doesn't care, and people that do.


Nessus posted:

What's funny about it? It's a major moment from a major Marvel Comics(tm) film which was widely seen and was tons of people's introduction to the character.

Please keep in mind BOTL views this entire situation as nothing but an opportunity to score points against the MCU in favor of the DCCU. You're not going to get a lot of good faith arguments from him.

Mr President posted:

People vote with their dollars alright that’s why marvel sales are in the toilet for pushing their diversity gimmick agenda instead of focusing on good stories!

I’m well within the rules of SA but some folks here in BSS don’t like nonconformists who don’t want to spend all hours of the day talking about how totally awesome it is that Squirel Girl has trans friends and how much of a scumbag Mark Millar is

Insulting the mod and the entire forum is a great way to ensure you don't get banned again.

Blockhouse posted:

God, you have to be a joke account, right? If you're not a joke account then you're a joke person and I don't know which is real anymore.

Mr. President is a rereg of a banned Trump-supporting Problem Poster.

Wanderer
Nov 5, 2006

our every move is the new tradition

Mr President posted:

People vote with their dollars alright that’s why marvel sales are in the toilet for pushing their diversity gimmick agenda instead of focusing on good stories!

I’m well within the rules of SA but some folks here in BSS don’t like nonconformists who don’t want to spend all hours of the day talking about how totally awesome it is that Squirel Girl has trans friends and how much of a scumbag Mark Millar is

You know, I've argued with you before, more than once, and it was never because you're a bright, unique spark who refuses to let the mainstream tame his restless ideas.

Usually it's because you're a bit of a twat who doesn't know what the gently caress he's talking about.

X-O
Apr 28, 2002

Long Live The King!

Mr President posted:

I’m well within the rules of SA but some folks here in BSS don’t like nonconformists who don’t want to spend all hours of the day talking about how totally awesome it is that Squirel Girl has trans friends and how much of a scumbag Mark Millar is

People can have nonconformist views. That's not a problem. You're an rear end in a top hat. That is a problem. Hope this helps you understand. Now gently caress off.

Aphrodite
Jun 27, 2006

In Iron Man Tony actually says Stark Industries won't make and sell weapons anymore.

Tony Stark, a private citizen, then makes his own weapon which he refuses to let Stark Industries even look at the power source for.

BravestOfTheLamps
Oct 12, 2012

by FactsAreUseless
Lipstick Apathy

Aphrodite posted:

In Iron Man Tony actually says Stark Industries won't make and sell weapons anymore.

Tony Stark, a private citizen, then makes his own weapon which he refuses to let Stark Industries even look at the power source for.

Well yeah, that's the fantasy - that you can produce cool gadgets guilt-free as a craftsman-inventor and not as an industrialist. Basically any corporate recruitment campaign will tell you that you can fulfil some creative potential if you join up. Or build Vision, apparently.

BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Oct 8, 2017

Salacious Spy
May 29, 2010

Well the word got around they said this kid is insane, man
Banged in the mouth and now he's got AIDS, man

Blockhouse posted:

God, you have to be a joke account, right? If you're not a joke account then you're a joke person and I don't know which is real anymore.

I think that, like a lot of other twentysomethings that hang around political discussions on the internet, what was once intended to be an ironic facade for expressing unironic opinions without paying the social price has devolved into simple shitbag posting

Vakal
May 11, 2008
Can't we all agree that the comic would have probably just been terrible anyway?

Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



Aphrodite posted:

In Iron Man Tony actually says Stark Industries won't make and sell weapons anymore.

Tony Stark, a private citizen, then makes his own weapon which he refuses to let Stark Industries even look at the power source for.
To be fair to Tony Stark I think his buildings were powered by the arc reactor? Which presumably provided power into the local grid.

At least in the movies.

Aphrodite
Jun 27, 2006

The factory that was destroyed at the end of Iron Man runs off an arc reactor Howard had built. But Tony kept the miniature one for himself.

They say something about how the large reactors are impractical and that's why they never mass produced them.

Tony eventually makes a better large reactor prototype to power Stark Tower (using the new element that was implied to be vibranium but was retconned.) The whole gimmick is that the Tower is totally off grid and self sufficient though. It's the only one currently operating at the time, and they haven't addressed any of that stuff since.

Right now arc reactors are just the built in power plants Tony puts in his and Rhodey's suits.

Lurdiak
Feb 26, 2006

I believe in a universe that doesn't care, and people that do.


Why are we talking about the plot to Iron Man.

Cabbit
Jul 19, 2001

Is that everything you have?

Lurdiak posted:

Why are we talking about the plot to Iron Man.

Probably because of this:

Lurdiak
Feb 26, 2006

I believe in a universe that doesn't care, and people that do.


I just think an analysis of whether the MCU thematically promotes neoliberal interventionism is slightly outside of the the purview of a thread discussing behind the scenes lovely things.

BravestOfTheLamps
Oct 12, 2012

by FactsAreUseless
Lipstick Apathy
It's a likely explanation of why the behind-the-scenes bullshit happened.

Viridiant
Nov 7, 2009

Big PP Energy
http://gwillowwilson.com/post/166159537168/yeah-no

Turns out G Willow Wilson was one of the writers gearing up to leave if this had continued to be a thing. That would have been a pretty big loss.

Lurdiak
Feb 26, 2006

I believe in a universe that doesn't care, and people that do.


BravestOfTheLamps posted:

It's a likely explanation of why the behind-the-scenes bullshit happened.

That's a very specious argument considering how separate the film and comic divisions of the company are and how many changes the company has gone through since Iron Man came out. You may recall they were purchased by one of the biggest companies in the world in the meantime.

You also seem to be having quite a difficult time separating the reality of what Marvel is and how the company operates and your dislike of the content of the films. You're aware a film is created by a studio and not the other way around, right?

Viridiant posted:

http://gwillowwilson.com/post/166159537168/yeah-no

Turns out G Willow Wilson was one of the writers gearing up to leave if this had continued to be a thing. That would have been a pretty big loss.

It's not surprising at all that talent, especially non-superstar talent like G. Willow Wilson, was completely blindsided by this and not informed or consulted. That's unfortunately how modern Marvel operates in general. But considering how predictable to the layman this backlash would've been, I honestly wonder how many people were consulted at all, and who pulled the trigger. It's easy to say Ike Permultter, but we don't actually have any evidence outside of "it seems like something he'd do".

Lurdiak fucked around with this message at 10:38 on Oct 8, 2017

BrianWilly
Apr 24, 2007

There is no homosexual terrorist Johnny Silverhand
I mean, they did seem to be able to hit the [EMERGENCY EJECT] button on this partnership pretty handily. You'd think that it wouldn't be so easy to call the whole thing off if it were really some tyrannical fiat from someone up high, especially if that someone has a reputation of being consistently bullheaded about those fiats.

BravestOfTheLamps
Oct 12, 2012

by FactsAreUseless
Lipstick Apathy

Lurdiak posted:

That's a very specious argument considering how separate the film and comic divisions of the company are and how many changes the company has gone through since Iron Man came out. You may recall they were purchased by one of the biggest companies in the world in the meantime.

You're aware a film is created by a studio and not the other way around, right?

You're confused by my rather simple point. I am not saying that the people responsible for the movies made the decision. I'm saying that people have a part in creating and maintaining the Iron Man/Avengers/Marvel brands, and Northrop-Grumman, saw this as great cross-brand synergy. People seem to want to scapegoat Ike Perlmutter because he's considered a toxic individual separate from the 'real' heart of Marvel. The much more likely explanation is that both sides of the partnership saw it as a fitting expression of their brands' values, as a translation of superhero fantasy into reality.

Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



BravestOfTheLamps posted:

You're confused by my rather simple point. I am not saying that the people responsible for the movies made the decision. I'm saying that people have a part in creating and maintaining the Iron Man/Avengers/Marvel brands, and Northrop-Grumman, saw this as great cross-brand synergy. People seem to want to scapegoat Ike Perlmutter because he's considered a toxic individual separate from the 'real' heart of Marvel. The much more likely explanation is that both sides of the partnership saw it as a fitting expression of their brands' values, as a translation of superhero fantasy into reality.
I do suspect that at some point, however, Northrop Grumman approached Marvel and gave them money to produce a promo comic, as opposed to an abstract values marriage.

BravestOfTheLamps
Oct 12, 2012

by FactsAreUseless
Lipstick Apathy

Nessus posted:

I do suspect that at some point, however, Northrop Grumman approached Marvel and gave them money to produce a promo comic, as opposed to an abstract values marriage.

Those aren't mutually exclusive at all.

Kurtofan
Feb 16, 2011

hon hon hon
what's Northrop Grumman's origin story

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BravestOfTheLamps
Oct 12, 2012

by FactsAreUseless
Lipstick Apathy

Kurtofan posted:

what's Northrop Grumman's origin story

As visionaries frequently are, Jack Northrop was an enigma. Mercurial, impetuous, he burned a brilliant flame during aviation’s nascent years. But, like the flame that burns twice as bright, Northrop’s burned, in many ways, half as long. The world would catch up to his vision, but not soon enough to fairly reward his faith in it.

Born in Newark, New Jersey (but raised in Santa Barbara, California), John “Jack” Knudsen Northrop entered the world in 1895, when aeronautical knowledge had barely moved beyond the whimsies of Da Vinci. The course for his life was set in 1911 upon watching a visiting pilot fly a pusher biplane over Santa Barbara. Nevertheless, his high school graduation represented the completion of the only formal education he would ever receive. For his lack of engineering degrees, Northrop would compensate with a ferocious work ethic, tremendous drive, and restless ambition.

-----

On June 20, 1911, a young high school senior delivered the salutatory remarks to his graduating class in Huntington, New York. In those remarks, he said:

“The final perfection of the aeroplane will be one of the greatest triumphs that man has ever gained over nature.”

Thus did a teenaged Leroy Grumman foresee man’s conquest of the air for what it would prove to be: The greatest human adventure of the twentieth century. Grumman would be central to that adventure, and more. He would be central to the greatest conflict in human history. He would be central to the revolution in naval warfare. He would be central to the Cold War. He would be central to the evolution of “aeroplanes” to aerospace.

  • Locked thread