How is DC not suing...
Power set seems exactly the same as Superman (haven't seen him fly though), as is landing in rural America.
if you classify something as a parody, then you can do that.
share
MovieChat Forums > Brightburn (2019) Discussion > How is DC not suing...
Same reason they didn't sue Dreamworks for Metro Man in Megamind I guess.
shareSimilar concepts do not constitute plagiarism. This seems to be a story of what if a different path had happened. It is obviously based on Superman, but can easily be seen as a different story.
It's basically a non-cold-war version of Superman: Red Son, an alternate Superman version where he lands in the Soviet Union and identifies with / fights for them instead of the U.S.
But the vague powers are not copyright.
“It's basically a non-cold-war version of Superman: Red Son”
LOL...
I thought of Superman: Red Son while watching this trailer. I like the concept for both.
shareYep! If only either DC or Marvel would use the charming bullshit that is the "multiverse" as a simple excuse to tell any sort of variation or alternate story they conceive... Rather than using it as an pointless excuse to bring all the alternate versions and previous actors together in increasingly silly story lines.
They could have done a version of Superman that is essentially Brightburn if they had the nerve and they could certainly do Red Son as a live action feature.
I thought of that too!
shareThey can't really sue. Vince McMahon and the WWE/WWF tried suing WCW or Scott Hall/Razor Ramon back in the 90's because Scott Hall was using the Razor Ramon gimmick in WCW, although Vince and the WWE/WWF owned the rights to the gimmick. But since he changed his name to Scott Hall instead of using Razor Ramon and called it the Scott Hall gimmick, Vince McMahon and the WWE/WWF lost the case. So it's pretty much the same thing here with the Brightburn movie. Lots of similarities and stuff to Superman, but since they changed the name of the main character and the name of the hometown and aren't using the actual Superman symbol/logo, DC and WB cannot sue. That or the case will be thrown out or DC and WB will lose. Someone will probably mention the whole Scott Hall/Razor Ramon case during the court battle. They probably already mentioned it to them anyway. It's also possible that DC and WB gave them permission to do it too. But what Vince McMahon and the WWE/WWF tried to do is probably why they haven't taken them to court.
share[deleted]
But superheroes and this movie have nothing to do with pro wrestling
shareIt's more likely that Mark Waid would sue. He wrote an excellent comic called Irredeemable that is very, very similar. I saw a Facebook post from him and he wasn't very happy with the creators of Brightburn.
shareI thought this too, although this concept has been explored by other writers too. Versions of Superman have been evil already, so not sure who actually had the idea first. I heard they were doing a movie adaptation of Irredeemable, and i wonder if this became tweaked enough to be the end product yet outside of plagiarism. BTW, Irredeemable is really good, and a must read for comic fans (just to second your opinion). The ending is one of the best.
shareSpecific Works are copyrighted and specific names and symbols can be trademarked....but general characteristics (alien, can fly, super strength) are not.
share