| |
In lugnet.licensed.batman, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.licensed.batman, Tim David wrote:
| |
If a film is unsuitable for children then why are toys
made of it?
|
Well, there’s a pollyanna answer and a cynical answer.
Pollyanna: The toys are produced for teenagers and adults who see the film
and who still like to collect; they’re only seemingly marketed to
children so that the adult buyers feel youthful and invigorated by their
purchases.
Cynical: Because they don’t care who sees the film or buys the merchandise,
as long as it rakes in a ton of cash.
Sadly, I think that the latter view is more in line with reality...
|
As a born-again Capitalist, the answer is clear to me, and Dave’s right: it’s
all about the money. If somebody can earn money from making toys by tying into a
craze, then they’ll do it. Far too many companies look only at the bottom
line, and their quality is low, accuracy is nonexistent, and the consumer
ultimately unsatisfied.
At least LEGO is picky about its licenses - for example, they won’t do Lord of
the Rings since it’s overall too violent for their target audience. Sure,
Batman has a violent side, but he’s less bloody than Aragorn scything through
Orcs on Pellenor field. Same for Star Wars - the action is heroic and the less
savory bits are glossed over.
I guess the bottom line for TLG would be that Batman has a large fan base of
young kids, and the violence isn’t necessarily prurient or bloody. Just my guess
why LEGO acquired the Batman license.
Kelly
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
71 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
