TRIVIA THREAD

Bendis, during Secret War, included Diamondback among the villains. When pointed out that Diamondback was a hero, he created an entirely new Diamondback.

Is that true?

>Interviews with the producer (?) of the Legion Of Super-Heroes producer stated that, had the show gotten a third season, Supergirl would have been introduced.

>>93403023
Charlton Comics printed their books with a cereal box printing press from the 1930s to the 1980s

>>93403078
No.

>>93403023
>>Brian Michael Bendis was approached to write some dialogue for Sam Raimi's SPIDER-MAN

Raimi wouldn't have asked a non-WGA non-screenwriter to do anything with his script at all.

>in 2002,

USM began publication - the first test of its popularity and therefore the writer's skill - in October 2000 (the cover date, implying a September release).

SPIDER-MAN was released on May 3, 2002 - by which time only 19 issues of USM had been published. Regardless of sales within the comic book market relative to older titles like Spectacular or Amazing Spider-Man, USM was simply so new that nobody working on it would have been on Raimi's radar.

That May 3, 2002 release date implies that principal photography on SPIDER-MAN completed before the end of 2001, after which only very limited reshoots would be possible; but since the character wears a mask, it's *possible* that ADR could be done to change something which was already in the script.

However: you can't contribute to a script without receiving a credit under your own, WGA-registered name, unless you choose to use a pseudonym or refuse the credit entirely.

There is no reason for an individual to refuse that credit and then claim they had a hand in the script.

>and including a quip mocking the Green Goblin's suit.

Multiple copies of the shooting script - as it was performed - have been made available over the years. If the quip is in those, it was written before November 2000, when shooting was originally slated to begin. The pushback of the original November 2001 release date by 6 months was not due to problems with the script according to contemporary reports still available online; so the script remained untouched from just two months after Bendis' first issue of any Spider-Man was published, at the maximum.

>Producers were so appalled

Raimi would never have approached him or allowed him to be approached for this very reason. Not WGA, no experience.

>>93403023
>OUT AM I?
>Yeah out.
>Like out?
>Well not out like gay, but yeah out.

>>93403434
This was a story published in one of the USM trades. It wasn't Raimi approaching him, but some female suit that aired a sneak preview viewing after principal photography was done. Apparently Stan Lee was in the viewing as well.

If the story's complete bullshit, I kind of wonder how Marvel got away with publishing it. They weren't even owned by Disney back then so they had no protection.

>>93403640
I would imagine that they just threw together a viewing for Marvel staff out of courtesy and Bendis happened to be invited; but that's not something that would involve being asked to pitch ideas for the script, especially after they've got it finished enough to show to anybody.

You might imagine that, on the night, Bendis (who had been, unsuccessfully, to LA in the 90s and fancied himself as a screenwriter) either misunderstood a question about his own work, or just straight up thought it would be appropriate to pitch dialogue options for a scene he'd watched and thought he could improve on (that's never appropriate).

In that particular situation, with producers in the room, you'd quickly get shut down by some pretty horrified people - because you're a nobody and if they hear anything you've said but can't prove they already had a similar line in the can, you'll probably add to the list of cranks already lining up to sue them over fucking nothing.

As far as publishing the tale goes - I don't imagine anybody at Sony actually read the letters pages or even bothered with USM a great deal. They weren't adapting USM's story, after all. Besides, there's no law against being a bullshitting idiot with an obviously falsifiable story; it's how all conversations at dinner parties work.

During Civil War 2, when they were deciding which long time hero would be killed off, Bendis had already written it as Spider-Man, however, Marvel execs turned to the lead writer of Amazing Spider-Man (Dan Slott) and asked him to weigh in on the idea of killing off Peter. Slott replied "No" in less than 20 seconds, this started a 20 minute argument between Bendis and Slott and eventually it was decided that they would use Hulk instead. As a result of this, Bendis refuses to allow Miles to appear in Amazing Spider-Man and forced the character to be completely cut from Clone Conspiracy.

>>93403434
>However: you can't contribute to a script without receiving a credit under your own, WGA-registered name, unless you choose to use a pseudonym or refuse the credit entirely.

Except it's done all the time. Joss Whedon rewrote "Speed" pretty much from scratch but wasn't credited for it.

>>93403991
Bendis really is a piece of shit, jesus christ.

>>93404029
Because he's a WGA-registered writer with significant experience and didn't want the credit.

Turning down credits is done all the time; because you don't want to be associated with a particular kind of movie, because you don't want a more senior writer whose script you worked on to feel offended by you personally, because you don't feel you did enough to warrant a credit even though you meet the minimum technical requirements for a credit, or just because it's a shitty movie.

In the case you're quoting, I would imagine Yost (the credited screenwriter) and Whedon (the assumed ghost), at the point at which WGA did their read of *all* scripts (including non-Yost, non-Whedon versions, if any) produced for Speed, came to an agreement that Yost would be credited and Whedon would not.

By 1994, Whedon had been credited for the Buffy movie (which was a flop) and some episodes of Roseanne; Graham Yost had written a lot more tv, but Speed would be his first movie credit, and, like Buffy with Whedon, was Yost's own, original idea. I would guess, being roughly the same age and probably knowing one another socially by that point, Whedon refused credit just as whoever had ghosted his own Buffy script had; passing on the favor, as it were.

File: nani.png (199KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 500x375px

>>93403991
>Slott replied "No" in less than 20 seconds
kek
>As a result of this, Bendis refuses to allow Miles to appear in Amazing Spider-Man and forced the character to be completely cut from Clone Conspiracy.
Wow, what a punishment I'm sure that upset Slott a lot.

>>93403991
Has this been confirmed?

>>93404149
Bendis was already planning Spider-Men 2 with Miles and Peter so I doubt this is true

>>93403434
Wouldn't you have to be part of the WGA to submit screenplays? Even if they don't get used?

>>93404649
Bendis was planning Spider-Man II years ago, but couldn't act on it because of Superior Spider-Man.

>>93403434
>>93403768
How many scripts have to sell before he's allowed to be part of the WGA, even if the movies aren't made?

>>93403434
>>93403768
>who had been, unsuccessfully, to LA in the 90s and fancied himself as a screenwriter

If he was trying to get scripts sold (and some were sold even if the project never got off the ground) before the 90's were over, wouldn't he be part of the WGA?

>>93405609
The plot thickens.

>>93403023
Bendis was also a consultant on the ASM series for Sony. One day he was called into the board room with the Sony suits. He didn't know why until they asked him one question. Mechanical or Organic?

Immediately he said Mechanical. Half the room groaned, half smiled.

He was the deciding vote.

>>93406552
ITT: Shit that never happened

>>93406572
>"They’ve asked me in to be the deciding vote on some stuff, which is an odd experience", he said. So before the Spider-Man movie reboot fully got going, "they sat me down in Amy Pascal’s office with this big roomful of producers and writers and directors, and she looked at me and said 'organic webshooters or mechanical webshooters?' I said 'mechanical', and half the table said, 'goddamn it!'"

>He added that "they were mad because I was clearly the deciding vote, even though I didn’t know that. So when I see the mechanical webshooters, I feel a little happiness. I feel like I did something good in the world".

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/the-amazing-spider-man/242587/the-amazing-spider-man-and-the-mechanical-webshooters-vote

Sorry I should have put the source right away, I forgot if you say something vaguely positive about Bendis it brings out the autismo patrol.

>>93404630
Only the part where Bendis wanted to kill off Peter.

>Though they also didn’t immediately settle on a big-name hero to turn into the culprit, Bendis kept referring to the doomed hero as Peter Parker, aka Spider-Man.

>“Do you see me worried? I’m not worried,” whispers “Amazing Spider-Man” writer Dan Slott. “This is not my first rodeo. By the end of the afternoon, it won’t be Peter Parker.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/marvel-kill-character-civil-war-ii-article-1.2491020

>>93406335
If he sold at least one script in the 90's (and he did) then >>93403434
is a complete fucking idiot for thinking "Bendis was lying because he's not in the WGA".

I heard this story, but I heard that it was Stan Lee himself who made the joke. Bendis was a nobody at this time and there's no reason they would have brought him on for the movie

>>93406655
that absolutely never happened

>>93406784
>Bendis was a nobody at this time

>>93403434 says that
>but since the character wears a mask, it's *possible* that ADR could be done to change something which was already in the script.

And his theory about Bendis lying was working on the faulty premise that Bendis wasn't part of the WGA (He'd have to be, his screenplay for Goldfish got sold in the 90's even if the project ended up in development hell).

Ultimate Spider-Man had a huge reception during the first few issues. And we've established that he was making trips to Hollywood in the 90's and had a screenplay sold, so he could've been asked to contribute in 2001. So there's really no reason to think he was lying about the story at all.

I mean really, of all the thinks to take shots at Bendis for (and there's a lot) this is the hill you choose to die on?

>>93403991
If true, this is one of the few things Slott has done right in years. Hopefully he told Bendis "If you want to kill Spider-Man, kill yours" or something to that effect.

>>93403991
After reading this, I went to LCS and bought a bunch of copies os ASM
Slott is our saviour

>>93406909
>He'd have to be,

If he didn't pay his subs in [year], he wasn't. It's not a lifetime membership.

>Ultimate Spider-Man had a huge reception during the first few issues.

Raimi was adapting a classic story, not USM; USM started around 50k sales and was still languishing outside the top 10 on 85k sales over a year later. By the time Spider-Man finished principal photography in April or May of 2001, USM was still making shit for shit.

>And we've established that he was making trips to Hollywood in the 90's and had a screenplay sold, so he could've been asked to contribute in 2001

First off, what screenplay did he sell? Was it ever produced? Was it for a feature or for tv? Who worked on it after he did? All of these are questions someone who would *seek the man out* for "rewrites" would already know the answers to. He'd have no problem getting work; he'd have lots of credits as a result. His first actual credit is as himself in a Wizard World documentary from 2002. His first writing credit didn't come until years later.

Secondly, there's every reason to think he was lying. It's Hollywood, you assume falsehood. If it turned out that LA was completely fictional tomorrow, anon, you would be the only one expressing surprise.

Thirdly, you don't "make trips" to LA to work in movies unless you're already a big deal. You live there. For years. You slog it out, you work as a reader, as a PA, as whatever you can get that gets you contact with people. You build a reputation.

If he had done that, and anybody working on this had known him, they would have hired (or ignored) him on that basis, regardless of his comic-book work.

>this is the hill you choose to die on?

No, but you did. You're walking out waving your pop gun around while the gas cloud rolls in. I mean fuck son, you're so out of line here defending this obvious lie I'm genuinely wondering if you actually are Bendis and you still to this day don't understand why you could never get movie work.

>>93407296
>If he didn't pay his subs in [year], he wasn't. It's not a lifetime membership.

Really? That's how you backpedal? "H-He probably didn't pay subs guys!"

>First off, what screenplay did he sell? Was it ever produced?
>>93406909
>He'd have to be, his screenplay for Goldfish got sold in the 90's even if the project ended up in development hell

I guess reading isn't your strong suit.

>Secondly, there's every reason to think he was lying. It's Hollywood, you assume falsehood.

So I guess we can assume you work in Hollywood then.

>BENDIS IS LYING YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY BENDIS

Holy fucking shit. I didn't expect you to sperge out that quickly.

>>93406552
>Bendis: the man who didn't know when to stop lying

>>93405010

Depends on the company. You can go to LA, write your little heart out in whatever faggoty free-wifi dump you choose, submit your scripts to all kinds of cranks and never once hear about needing to be WGA. The big places will simply return your script, unopened, because they don't take unsoliciteds - it never goes past the guy on the door, in other words. The smaller places will sometimes take them but only usually on recommendation, which is where networking comes in.

If you're not WGA, you can join just like that - as long as you pay your fees and meet the eligibility, which most can - but surprising numbers of people don't bother.

>>93405609
No, not automatically. If he left LA in the 90s and returned to New York (or wherever), then like most failed screenwriters he probably let his membership lapse. They'd still cover him for things he did during his active membership - anything submitted then would still be producible, he'd still be invited to the final decision on credits - but ideally if he still had something in production, he'd still be paying his dues (and working out there).

>>93405214

Currently he could be an Associate Member for $100 and a single sale. For full membership it's much more of both (like $2,500 initiation) but there's far fewer full than Associate members.

>>93407422
>I guess reading isn't your strong suit.

Not replies that aren't directed at me. Do you have the autism? Who reads a whole thread, anon? Life's too short.

>Really? That's how you backpedal? "H-He probably didn't pay subs guys!"


Who's backpedaling? I'm saying he didn't have a membership. It's the position I felt was most likely to begin with. You haven't shown me that he did, only that he sold one thing. So at best, he had an associate membership in what, he's 49 now, so ninety-three? Ninety-four? Why in god's name would a man who is not a full member of WGA west or east have maintained his AM status for eight more years just in case he finally got that movie deal he was dying for, even tho his one sale was filed in the circular and he moved home as a result?

I'm not shifting the goalposts here anon: I've pointed out the obvious flaws in the story and instead of researching them you're just saying it's obvious to you that he wasn't lying. Well, OK. You're allowed to have your feelings even when you're wrong, but just so we're clear: this inability to see the flaws in story structure was the reason he never found work in LA and couldn't translate his Creative Committee work into screenwriting gigs. He's bad at storytelling; he always has been.

>>93407519
>No, not automatically. If he left LA in the 90s and returned to New York (or wherever),

He lived in Cleveland at the time he was going out to LA, then did Fortune and Glory recounting all his trips to LA, then said in that same book he and his wife moved to Portland.

I don't know about you but I would assume that moving from the midwest to the west coast would imply trying to get easier route to Hollywood.

>>93407666
Powers had a tv show.

But nobody remembers because it was on Playstation TV.

>>93407666

>Not replies that aren't directed at me. Do you have the autism? Who reads a whole thread, anon? Life's too short.

Not that anon but saying you're not really willing to read and calling the other guy autistic doesn't make you a more reliable source of info than Bendis.

Well, this thread took an unexpected turn.

>>93407748
Yeah, like 15 years after the point at which this story supposedly occurred.

>>93407698
Not unless you move to LA. Seriously. Portland is like... a 2 hour flight away? Who's going to hire a nobody who can be in the room for meetings in just 2 hours, when they can hire a hungrier nobody who can be in the room for meetings because they live in a box outside the lot?

>>93407775
No, and I see why you'd say that, but you can at least read up on the claims I'm making here. The only source the other anon offers is Bendis himself - even someone who'd been credited as an assistant to a name on that movie would probably be able to confirm/deny the story. But the story doesn't name any names other than Bendis.

It's circular; the whole thing makes no sense.

Even what the anon is arguing now - that Bendis totes had a WGA west associate membership in like 1993 and would obvs have kept that up until 2002 - makes no sense.

Because even if he did - and I'm honestly not even sure you can without making a few more sales or having something in active development - if it were true, then his contributions would have been perfectly fine and, contrary to what Bendis claims, nobody would have recoiled in horror at the idea of him making contributions.

It was the fact he wasn't asked to make any that's at the core of the argument here: he says he was, but there's nothing in his story that stacks up to that conclusion. Studios simply don't work that way and there's any number of actively working studio people blogging, microblogging, writing books out there who'll confirm that for you. People with credits; people with production companies you've actually heard of.

The guy's a liar.

>>93407849
Here's a quick refresher for everyone who's new.

>I feel like Bendis is lying.
>I feel like Bendis isn't lying.
>Intermission with dancing monkeys

I don't know why they put the intermission last, seems weird but whatever.

>>93407953
Do you work in Hollywood, anon? Because if not, this is some next level autism.

File: Fortune and Glory 03 04.jpg (154KB, 652x1024px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 652x1024px

>>93407953
>The only source the other anon offers is Bendis himself - even someone who'd been credited as an assistant to a name on that movie would probably be able to confirm/deny the story. But the story doesn't name any names other than Bendis.

Go read Fortune and Glory. He actually names names you can go ask them yourself if you want. Cary Brokaw is one name here, Marc Andreyko (who showed up a lot in Fortune and Glory) is another. Maybe you can ask Andreyko if Bendis is in the WGA.

>>93408092
Well he said
>Secondly, there's every reason to think he was lying. It's Hollywood, you assume falsehood.

So if he works in Hollywood does that mean we can assume he was lying this whole thread?

File: IMG_1516.jpg (188KB, 1600x1204px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1600x1204px

>"Listen Peter, with great privilege comes great reperations."

In 2005, DC Comics quietly scheduled an interview with Brian Michael Bendis to determine whether or not they should bring him on as a writer of their then-upcoming weekly series "52". It's not confirmed what exactly he said, but it is reported that twenty-five minutes into the interview he was rushed out of DC's offices, avoiding improvised projectiles being thrown by an enraged Dan Didio.

Bendis is now (allegedly) informally blacklisted by DC Comics.

>>93410686
Cool headcanon, bro.

Well some overly boring and argumentative people managed to fuck up a thread that's usually top quality, awesome work my cheeto-amigos.