Old MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Posted Monday, June 26th, 2006 - Comments Off on 'Peter Pan' Heirs Hate Moore Wendy Porn
Be Sociable, Share!

'Peter Pan' Heirs Hate Moore Wendy Porn

To most of us, the words “cartoon girl-on-girl action” spell nothing but harmless delight.
Not so for those who own the rights to Peter Pan, the most popular English-language children’s drama and novel of all time. Writer J.M. Barrie, who died in 1937, gave the profits of his work to London’s Great Ormond Street Children’s Hospital. As the Galleycat publishing news blog reported recently, hoo-boy, were they pissed when they learned that V FOR VENDETTA’s Alan Moore had plans for a graphic (really graphic) project called LOST GIRLS, a “porno-graphic” novel in which Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz meets Alice from Alice in Wonderland and Wendy from Peter Pan, and (as near as [Galleycat] can make out from the descriptions) they tell each other X-rated versions of their stories while having hot sex with each other.”
The Pan heirs response to Moore: Think again, perv.
peterpan4-1.jpg

Peter Pan and friends aren’t in the public domain. Though the Great Ormond Street trust has given its blessing to recent, critically acclaimed movies PETER PAN (2003), with Jason Isaacs as a swinging, sexy Captain Hook, and the Oscar nominated biopic FINDING NEVERLAND, there’s no way that a slash-fiction ‘toon will fly with them.
Moore, the subject of a recent cover story in Publisher’s Weekly, takes a different view: he can’t believe that permission is needed to write about such well known characters. Creators of satire, historial fiction, fan fiction and other forms of literary and artistic appropriation agree with Moore’s “fair use” argument.
I don’t think Moore will be deterred by any legal injunction. And Moore’s fans, who are legion, will manage tto get their hands on the finished product no matter how much of a fight the Peter Pan people wage. But it makes you wonder: who owns a fictional character, when that character far outlives the copyright of its creator?

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments Off on 'Peter Pan' Heirs Hate Moore Wendy Porn

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon