N2darkness wrote: Thu Jun 29, 2023 12:40 pm
I was looking for other potential designs Weta had drawn for Orcrist and found this article.
Those are my photos and drawing. I have a vague memory of that. I think there was a video interview done too, but I never saw it.
N2darkness wrote: Thu Jun 29, 2023 12:40 pm
I've often seen numerous times where companies mention "licensor approval" be it from statues, toys or replicas and am very curious if they have ever "not" approved something.
Many times, but those were usually when the movie/movies were coming out. Things are much more strictly controlled. They want to keep things representative of the brand, keep graphics consistent with all licensees. Just making sure their iP is up to a certain standard. It really depends on the licensor though. Some care, some don't. Sometimes a studio will have a good licensing team for a few years, then they down size or hire people who have zero knowledge of the properties. Then the whole studio get bought and sold, they can everyone, and start over. It goes in cycles with some movie companies.
It always amazes me when we present a new product idea to a certain licensor and they have no idea what the thing is. I have to explain it to them, cite references from their own film, show them their own prop photos, et cetera. Then when it comes to marketing copy for the packaging, COAs, et cetera, they want to know where we go the info. It's a bit sad when I know the property better than the licensor.
N2darkness wrote: Thu Jun 29, 2023 12:40 pm
I have no first person knowledge, but it often feels like a rubber stamp and anyone who want to shell out the money for an official license can make whatever they want. Prime examples are ASMUS and Iron Studios!
The older the license it, the looser things seem to get. At this point, there is a certain movie company that is not doing great financially that I think will happily license whatever you want, within reason, if it means more $$$ coming in to them for an old property.