All the Marvelous Movies

Yesterday's LA Times Calendar section featured this story by Geoff Boucher (the LA Times staff writer who handles all things comic-book-ish) about Marvel Studios.  

Folks may recall that a couple of years ago Marvel got tired of studios throughout Hollywood raking in the big bucks on adaptations of Marvel characters, while Marvel itself merely received a licensing fee.  It sought to seize the means of production; and secured half a billion in venture capital to start its own studio.  (Not to be confused with the animation studio Marvel had in the Eighties).  

Now, as the studio's first flick prepares to roll out in May, the paper looks at the studio's prospects.  

On the bad side, it's not a good time to be an independent studio, with New Line dessicating into a division of Warner Brothers.  Plus, other studios have the rights to such cash cows as Spider-Man (Sony), X-Men (Fox) Fantastic Four (Fox again), etc.   And although Marvel struck a deal with the WGA during the writers' strike, the strike still hurt the studio:  It promised its investors 10 movies in five years, but expects to put out only one movie next year.

 On the plus side, Marvel Studios has the rights to such characters as The Hulk (they apparently reverted after Ang Lee's version failed to set the world on fire), Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, and numerous minor characters.  

Further, the studio's May release, IRON MAN, looks to be spectacular.   It's got great buzz, helped along by fantastic trailers.  A hit first time out on plate would go a long way toward persuading  folks to make theirs Marvel.  'Nuff said. 

Con Job

Over at the LA Times, Calendar Section columnist Patrick Goldstein has discovered a new adjective: "Comic-Con." So capitalized. And like a kid with a new Transformer, he can't resist playing with it. In his column in today's paper, which discusses horror goremeister Eli Roth, Mr. Goldstein writes about "Comic-Con fan boys"; "Comic-Con festivals"; and -- rather redundantly -- "Comic-Con conventions."

Given that "Comic-Con," as capitalized, generally refers to Comic-Con International: San Diego, and there is just one of those a year, one is left to wonder what Goldstein means by "Comic-Con festivals" and "Comic-Con conventions." Has he decided that Comic-Con is so publicized -- particularly in Hollywood, which has increasingly turned to the convention as a way to start viral campaigns for movies via Web-augmented word of mouth -- that he thinks that there are several a year? Is he referring to all comic book conventions with the label "Comic-Con" because it's the one he thinks his readers will recognize?

Or perhaps he just needs a thesaurus.