Animefantastique Ends Publication
Thomas E. Reed
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]
I read with regret that Issue 4 will be the last of "Animefantastique,"
the animation magazine published by "Cinefantastique."
I thought they were attempting something dangerous when CFQ, as a
mainline science fiction film magazine, decided to get into the field
of anime. There are already several anime magazines out there - some of
them published by the anime video distributors - who have the market
pretty well tied up. Even though CFQ brought in people who knew the
field well (like the estimable Eric Lurio) and had a strong reputation
for critical insight, they were fighting well-entrenched magazines with
loyal readers who wouldn't cross over.
There's also the problem that magazines that write about animation
don't have a lot of advertisers breaking down the doors. Cel sales
(which are a con job as bad as POG's or Magic cards) aren't enough.
Even though I write for a competitor, seeing anyone's magazine fail is
heartbreaking. I can onlyhope that the animation writers are given
pages in CFQ to bring animation news to the wider audience for science
fiction and genre films.
Tom Reed says, there's fantasy gaming
all year long from SunQuest...visit
http://www.sunquestgames.com
The Man Who Turns Steel Into Dust!
>Cel sales
>(which are a con job as bad as POG's or Magic cards) aren't enough.
What do you mean by that?
-peter destructo
Thomas E. Reed
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]
I said,
> >Cel sales
> >(which are a con job as bad as POG's or Magic cards) aren't enough.
And Peter Destructo said,
> What do you mean by that?
Well, let's see. You put out $1000 for a cel. You hang it on your wall.
You hold onto it, hoping it will be valuable and appreciate in value.
Ten year s later, you shop it around to try to make money on it. The
best you can do is $200. I'd call that a con job, wouldn't you?
The fact is that collectibles are ALL a ripoff. They are appeals, not
only to greed, but to the desperate hope that you will be able to
become rich with a minor investment in something you love. You would do
better putting that thousand dollars into a good Dow Jones stock and
holding onto it for a decade than buying a cel, or a "death of
Superman" comic book, or a "Magic: The Gathering" Black Lotus card, or
for that matter that stupid-ass hologram-foil Charizard Pokemon card.
Art is pretty to look at. That's one thing. Art is a gamble you're
likely to lose if you actually put money in the stuff.
Sufficient explanation for you, Peter?
chance wolf
Thomas Reed wrote:
>Well, let's see. You put out $1000 for a cel. You hang it on your wall.
>You hold onto it, hoping it will be valuable and appreciate in value.
>Ten year s later, you shop it around to try to make money on it. The
>best you can do is $200. I'd call that a con job, wouldn't you?
Depends what cel you spend your hard-earned pesos on, really,
especially if you happen to be one of the folks who thinks their
'limited edition sericel' will ever be worth $3125.00 to anyone else.
What's disappointing about the whole Gallery/Studio setup is that
it's usually only the well-heeled 'investor' types that can actually afford
them; leaving those of us who appreciate the art for the art's sake
out in the cold, or taking out that third mortgage for a piece of something
we enjoyed viewing as a film.
The vendors are generally quick to point out that the studios themselves
only release a certain number of cels, thereby creating an artificial
'rarity' and accompanying 'what the market will bear' pricetag that the
vendor has no control over. The studios themselves point out that
they're 'keeping the quality up' by only releasing 'A' or 'B' cels of
favourite characters, but really simply don't want to flood the market and
drive down prices. Economically sound, if you happened to be
an economist, but in reality, they're missing that portion of the
market willing to buy 'C' cels at a price which reflects a 'C' cel, or
a storyboard drawing somewhere beneath what seems an
entirely arbitrary sticker price of $75.00
>The fact is that collectibles are ALL a ripoff. They are appeals, not
>only to greed, but to the desperate hope that you will be able to
>become rich with a minor investment in something you love.
I dunno. When I visit people with cels or storyboard drawings adorning
their walls, I show an interest, then I let them get the first paragraph in.
If they start talking right off the bat about how much such-and-such is
"worth nowadays", well, I know what they're all about - y'know? But,
just as often, these folks talk about how they loved such-and-such
character and just had to have a cel of them, or lionized the artist
responsible, or just admired the style.
>You would do
>better putting that thousand dollars into a good Dow Jones stock and
>holding onto it for a decade than buying a cel, or a "death of
>Superman" comic book, or a "Magic: The Gathering" Black Lotus card, or
>for that matter that stupid-ass hologram-foil Charizard Pokemon card.
Heh. I've been getting a giggle out of the whole "Beanie Babies" thing. There
are people out there cornerning the market on these things hoping ol' Ty
will retire them and somehow disappear from the face of the earth - thereby
increasing their value a googolfold. Yawn. Happened with Cabbage Patch
Kids, Little Orphan Alien, Elmo, and now little stuffed critters which
look as though they were made in Home Ec by a sewing student not
entirely unfamiliar with rolling paper. Gives the 'ZigZag' setting whole
new meaning.
>Art is pretty to look at. That's one thing. Art is a gamble you're
>likely to lose if you actually put money in the stuff.
...and while I search estate sales for that elusive original 50 cent
"Steamboat Willie"
cel, I'd be glad of any pointers to *reasonably* priced storyboard panels from
"Balto" - especially if they happen to contain Steele and Star.
chance (who has a couple of cels and the odd story bible...)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Thomas E. Reed
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]
Thanks, Chance, for being one of the few voices of reason in this whole
thing.
Something that's bothered me about cel collecting, the Pokemon thing,
and certain other elements of genre entertainment collecting is that
the attitude is a little more complicated than pure greed. (Which is
what my previous post suggested.) After talking to a few friends and
doing a little meditating, I've figured out what it is.
There are certain people that want to make money on their hobby or
interest, because they can't justify loving something for itself.
People laugh if you say you've collected animation art because you love
the look of Bugs Bunny. But if you say it's an investment and it's
worth a lot of money, even cretins look at you with respect.
In the same respect, some friends of mine want to make a "killing" with
role playing game conventions, even though they rarely do better than
to break even. And you know those parents are accompanying the kids and
helping them to buy far too many "Pokemon" cards because, if they get
that rare one, they can (they believe) sell it for a fortune and win
the respect of their peers.
In other words, collecting cels, et al, is just another expression of
the self-hatred that geeks and genre fans are known for. They
understand that the world only values money, and they don't have the
courage or the ability to defend their love of something that doesn't
instantly involve money.
Tom Reed says, enjoy The Games at MegaCon
Presented by SunQuest, March 31-April 2,
in downtown Orlando FL! Details at...
http://www.sunquestgames.com