The Complete Zenith

[TordelBack]

I've said this more than once before, but I think the scene in Phase 2 (excerpt by Sauchie above) where Zenith [spoiler]kills his poor old Dad[/spoiler] is the one of the best choreographed fight scene in comics - a real masterpiece.  In fact the whole of Phase 2 is packed with treats - such a simple story on the face of it, but with the most marvellous subtleties played out in the art.  The single shot of Robert's expression where he's seated with his back to Peyne as he monologues completely changes our perception of his character. 

[Professor Bear]

It gets better, Ian Edginton left a comment:

"Actually Jim, Rich hasn't spoken to me or, to my knowledge Pete Hogan at all. He's just lifted a chat we were having straight off Facebook. Would've been nice if he asked first but then again, it would have meant that Pete and I weren't 'creator's taking sides' but just a couple of blokes having a chat about comics. Where's the fun in that tho' eh?"

I'm not defending Rich Johnson here because I am unaware of what "The Beefs" may be, but public comments left on a social networking site for all to see might arguably be fair game for reporting.

A 2000ad boycott would be a weird thing to see.  The fact that such a thing existed would surely just attract more attention to the book's marginal profile?  Going by the attempted boycotts of things like DC's Nu52 and Marvel's Avengers Arena that just resulted in more publicity, I think we should try and get one going for our own shameless corporate rag - if nothing else, the debate about creators having their characters stolen by companies might help Hogan shift some of those new Tom Strong comics he's writing for DC.

[Trout]

I remember when this thread was all people complaining they didn't have £100. 

[Jim_Campbell]

I'm not defending Rich Johnson here because I am unaware of what "The Beefs" may be, but public comments left on a social networking site for all to see might arguably be fair game for reporting.

That is unarguable. What's reprehensible is the failure to cite the source and the changing of context by the way they're presented.

Cheers

Jim

[IndigoPrime]

That is unarguable. What's reprehensible is the failure to cite the source and the changing of context by the way they're presented.

This. I regularly pull content for the web for news I write. What I absolutely do not do is avoid also reporting the source and change the context. Johnson's article is an exercise in deception, inferring (although not stating—he's clearly too smart for that from a legal standpoint) that the site itself got comments from the creators. Although firing out rumour as news does him no favours, and could be detrimental to all parties involved.

[Professor Bear]

I cede that it's muckraking (I believe the coined phrase specific to the web is "click bait") and I do hear where you're both coming from, but I don't really view it as much different from what many other comics commentary sites do.

[Frank]

I cede that it's muckraking (I believe the coined phrase specific to the web is "click bait") and I do hear where you're both coming from, but I don't really view it as much different from what many other comics commentary sites do.

The bad man said a bad thing about the good people.

[TordelBack]

Long piece by Laura Sneddon...

http://comicsbeat.com/mad-mental-crazy-the-true-life-of-the-fabulous-zenith/

Unfortunately as we shall see, the publisher has a habit of not hiring back those who challenge for rights...

That's one extraordinary statement right there, and in no way supported by what follows in the piece.

[IndigoPrime]

"In Part 2 next week we'll look at the other creators who have challenged for or recovered their rights, and how or if their cases differed"

The inference is that part's yet to be published. Certainly, part one has nothing about this, bar Moore going off in a strop.

I do feel with this piece there's more than a hint of agenda (which, to be fair, Sneddon admits to), but this didn't sit easily with me:

Do note that no mention of actual signed contracts is made anywhere – that's not damning in itself of course, but its worth pointing out all the same.

How often do comics creators talk contracts? More to the point, how often did they in 1987?

[TordelBack]

The inference is that part's yet to be published. Certainly, part one has nothing about this, bar Moore going off in a strop.

I thought that too, but I think it might have been useful to explain that 2000AD (and by extension Zenith) is no longer published by IPC/Fleetway: in that context, what was the point of the statement "the publisher has a habit of not hiring back those who challenge for rights"?  Are we really going to see evidence of a Rebellion blacklist in future installments? And seeing as we almost certainly aren't, isn't that a bit disingenuous?

Even the 'evidence' presented (so far) re: Fleetway/IPC was creators not wanting to work for a company who didn't cede rights, rather than the publisher not wanting to hire them after a rights claim.  And being realistic, why would any company want to re-hire someone who would subsequently be contesting the terms of their standard contract (implicit or otherwise, fair or otherwise)?

[GordonR]

Off the top of my head, I can think of only two creators who mounted legal challenges to the 2000AD's work-for-hire use of their creations. These were Mark Millar and Hilary Robinson, and both instances happened in when the title was under the ownership of Egmont Fleetway. One of them was successful, one of them was not.

Neither of them have worked for the title since, but I don't think that's anything to do with a blacklisting policy. Mark's enormously successful elsewhere, and doesn't need to, and Hilary Robinson's work was - frankly - just awful.

[M.I.K.]

and Hilary Robinson's work was - frankly - just awful.

I don't think she was as bad as a lot of people make out, she just wasn't very 2000ad.

Loads of folk seemed to like Medivac 318 in spite of the giant talking rabbits, I quite liked Zippy Couriers, (though it was a bit 'girly'), Chronos Carnival was childish twaddle, but in retrospect would probably have been better suited to the '80s Eagle or suchlike and Survivor was a more coherent story than the original Mean Team was. I didn't think much of most of her future shocks, but didn't she write that really freaky one with the reclusive actress from the 1920s on a boat?

[Frank]

Another vote for 'frankly awful' here. She was no worse than some of the others making up the numbers at that time, but that's not saying much. Fleischer, Mackenzie, Millar and Brosnan might all have done work which contained some individual interesting ideas or good lines during the time when they were drafted in to fill the Wagner, Grant and Mills shaped hole in the comic, but they're still fighting it out between themselves for the title of the very worst hacks to take up space in 2000ad.

'Frankly awful' sums up that whole period when, within the space of a year, the comic went from being something I pored over again and again each week to something I had to force myself to struggle through.

[Professor Bear]

I liked Medivac, and I'm not just saying that because the alternative take on the material was the abominable Mercy Heights.  Survivor, too, and Zippy Couriers - all strips that came from trying to create worlds and characters rather than delivery methods for the next soundbite or rehashed action movie plot.  I suppose in that respect, Robinson certainly didn't fit in the 200ad that was around the corner at that time.

[Frank]

Long piece by Laura Sneddon...

http://comicsbeat.com/mad-mental-crazy-the-true-life-of-the-fabulous-zenith/

Cheers for the interesting read. The Morrison quotes there regarding the collected editions of Zenith do appear to confirm that he knew exactly what terms he was producing the work under. That doesn't affect the validity of any legal challenge, but it does illuminate his actions.