Thread "Whose Nostalgia?" in forum "Comic Talk and General Discussion *"

Posted at 2:10PM, Oct. 16, 2022

I haven't really come up with more then a silly tinfoil hat "theory" of the subject, but something that has been bugging me is why a lot of the Disney Remakes are created, a huge keyword that is agreed upon by many is Nostalgia. Which doesn't quiet sit well with me, mainly many of the ones who were young at the time of release and to see it in theaters, or on tape, or on TV tend to hate it for one reason or another.

But here's a rub, I work as Passenger assistant at an airport and tend to help a lot of older folks, occasionally during small talk movies is brought up and many older women LOVE the remakes, often seeing them as "grown up" and "finally told right".

Basically I feel like a huge chunk of the remakes are actually fueled by the parent, not the "kids" of the era.

It wasn't planned or some kind of advanced marketing manipulation but just a lot of companies falling face first into a gold ingot.

That is just a small bit of stuff I wanted to talk about the idea of Nostalgia but haven't really come to a fully formed idea beyond the feeling that so much of the modern nostalgia being felt isn't for the generation that grew up with it, but their parents because of the idea that "kids don't have money, parents do."

So often I ask the question, who is this nostalgic for?

Anyway, just wanted to broach the topic but just don't have it fully formed and want to hear other's views on the topic.

Posted at 9:10PM, Oct. 16, 2022

Nostalgia is always for the people who experienced the original instance of the thing.

With Disney and other companies doing remakes I don't think they care about nostalgia though, I think the real issue is just maintaining control of intellectual property (IP). Copyrights expire so you have to create new projects that use them and extend it in various creative ways.

-e.g. the copyright to various aspects of Poh Bear expired but they still have other rights to it remaining, the image of the characters I think. So someone recently made their own Poh Bear horror movie but they can't use the original likeness of the characters. Which means Disney can still make their own stuff and differentiate it.

They also just want to make use of their gigantic store of IP that they own. Working from a pre-existing IP is much easier that developing a new one because all the structure is already there, the look of the thing, you have an idea of how to market it, you have name recognition, there are fans primed to see it, and once you announce the new version people want to come back and check out the original so you get more value out of it that way too.

I think that nostalgia is just a side effect most of the time, not an intention- unless it's specifically marketed at a particular group, like parents who loved Alf for example, or a movie like Ready Player One.

Posted at 9:10PM, Oct. 16, 2022

South Park had a nostalgia based theory about remakes with their "'member berries", but they missed the mark. Disney has ALWAYS been about IP and copyright first.

Posted at 10:10PM, Oct. 16, 2022

Ozoneocean wrote:
South Park had a nostalgia based theory about remakes with their "'member berries", but they missed the mark. Disney has ALWAYS been about IP and copyright first.

That goes back Walt himself. He had a few of his first designs stolen and guarded everything very jealously afterward. Disney is still very protective of their IP and copyright.

For a long time one of the few companies licensed for Disney tie-in toys with their own very famous doll brand was equally jealous of the image and reputation of their fashion doll trademark. Ask the guy who did the parody Trailer Trash Barbie.

When first starting out doing action figure photo comics it was common knowledge NOT to use Barbie because anything too off-color and Mattel would come after you.

Posted at 2:10AM, Oct. 17, 2022

Make a Pooh comic if you like, but don't give him that distinctive red Disney shirt, that's their Pooh image.

Posted at 7:10PM, Oct. 17, 2022

dpat57 wrote:
Make a Pooh comic if you like, but don't give him that distinctive red Disney shirt, that's their Pooh image.

I had a look into that XD
Apparently the original illustrator EH Sheppard drew him with a shirt in some examples, I don't know if there were any red ones though.
The first time you really distinctively see him with a red shirt though was in 1932 after Milne sold the rights to Stephen Slesinger (in 1931), it's on the cover of a board game.

Good to know Disney didn't create that even if they may have the copyright to it. I don't think they should though since that was 90 years ago?
How long does copyright last now?

Posted at 12:10AM, Oct. 18, 2022

Disney has been known to extend copyright protection through acts of Congress. Disney's image of Pooh probably is distinctive enough to qualify as a unique rendition and therefore protected.
Only the A.A. Milne characters from before 1926 are public domain. So Tigger is still copyrighted.
The book Bambi is in public domain but all images from the Disney animated feature version are protected.

Posted at 6:10AM, Oct. 18, 2022

Ozoneocean wrote:
… Good to know Disney didn't create that even if they may have the copyright to it. I don't think they should though since that was 90 years ago?
How long does copyright last now?

In the United states, 70 years is a good rule of thumb from which to start. But it's a moving target. Big publishers like Disney are frequently lobbying Congress to extend that time frame, so be sure to check if in doubt. The copyright laws of individual states also vary, and those laws take priority over federal laws. For example, the copyright to a deceased person's likeness expires based on the laws of the state in which that individual died.