Case Studies in Intellectual Property: Dick Tracy

[Paul Farquhar]

I don't know how old you two are, but I was born in the 70s roughly a full decade after it was cancelled, and The Addams Family television show was a staple of daytime television while I was growing up. The majority of teenagers who went to see the movie in 1991 were familiar with the property because they watched the show when they were younger. Contrast that with Dick Tracy, I doubt any of the teenagers who went to see it had seen the Dick Tracy serials from the 30s, the movie from the 40s, and I bet a lot of them had never read the comic. Dick Tracy was out of date and out of touch, but The Addams Family wasn't.

Oh, and The Addams Family gave us one of the best pinball games ever!

YMMMV.

They didn't have daytime TV (apart from the Open University) when I was growing up.

But the point is, the Addams Family movies succeeded because they were good, not because of the IP.

Which brings us back to this:

I don't think it was bad at all. It was was a perfectly fine movie for which no one was clamoring, with an advertising budget it couldn't hope to make up, and indeed put out in the wrong decade. It was trying to be the next Batman (all the Mystery Men movies of the 90s were), when it really would have done better alongside (and with a total budget equaling or being less than) Superman II. It was corny and knew it. It used bright primary colors (offset by shadows) instead of Batman black-in-shadow. It included a plucky kid who at one point saves the day. It features dueling female love interests for the male protagonist (a Helen and an Amy). The special effects are almost exclusively in the makeup department, with limited fantastic physics using techniques that were used in the 50s. It was a nice, simple, late 70s/early 80s hokey comic book movie that would have worked just fine in a pre-Batman world (and pre-Batman budget). Especially if it was a property that people wanted to see remade. As to that, I have no idea how it works. The Adams Family was out of date and out of touch (not as much, being peoples' parent's IP, not their grandparents) when the

Tim Burton's Batman succeeded because of Tim Burton, not because there was a huge public demand for highly stylised comic book movies. Stylised movies are distancing, and it's hard for an audience to empathise which characters who are portrayed as fundamentally unreal. If you aren't an auteur you should aim for naturalism, it's easier to pull off. The 1945 Dick Tracy movie was naturalistic, and a much better film.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I don't know how old you two are, but I was born in the 70s roughly a full decade after it was cancelled, and The Addams Family television show was a staple of daytime television while I was growing up. The majority of teenagers who went to see the movie in 1991 were familiar with the property because they watched the show when they were younger. Contrast that with Dick Tracy, I doubt any of the teenagers who went to see it had seen the Dick Tracy serials from the 30s, the movie from the 40s, and I bet a lot of them had never read the comic. Dick Tracy was out of date and out of touch, but The Addams Family wasn't.

Mid 70s, and this confirms what I meant -- AF was your parent's IP, and thus was still in cultural circulation (significantly more than DT, which your grandparents grew up with).

Tim Burton's Batman succeeded because of Tim Burton, not because there was a huge public demand for highly stylised comic book movies. Stylised movies are distancing, and it's hard for an audience to empathise which characters who are portrayed as fundamentally unreal. If you aren't an auteur you should aim for naturalism, it's easier to pull off. The 1945 Dick Tracy movie was naturalistic, and a much better film.

My point about Batman is that it changed the game/raised the acceptable level of play. Superman II-IV, Supergirl, 1980s Flash Gordon, Swamp Thing -- these all worked (or didn't, as some were failures) in the era before Batman raised expectations on what a superhero movie was supposed to be. Dick Tracy (1990) and the rest of the 90s Mystery Men movies would have fit in perfectly in that environment.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

My point about Batman is that it changed the game/raised the acceptable level of play. Superman II-IV, Supergirl, 1980s Flash Gordon, Swamp Thing -- these all worked (or didn't, as some were failures) in the era before Batman raised expectations on what a superhero movie was supposed to be. Dick Tracy (1990) and the rest of the 90s Mystery Men movies would have fit in perfectly in that environment.

You omit Superman (I). That was the movie that raised expectations. Then the ones you list - none of which where massively successful in their time - lowered them again.

 

[Cadence]

Mid 70s, and this confirms what I meant -- AF was your parent's IP, and thus was still in cultural circulation (significantly more than DT, which your grandparents grew up with).

I wonder if some things that came out in the 60s and early 70s might be more familiar to the kids of the late 70s early 80s than to those when they first came out.

Did original release in 60s and early 70s only give you two chances ever to catch it? (Release night and then one replay after the regular season). And then they were during prime time and had to compete with bed time and parents viewing choices.

In the 70s and early 80s (for midsize cities anyway), the fourth channel/independent stations filled their schedule with nothing but reruns. I got Dick Van Dyke and I Love Lucy five days a week after school. The big thing here might be if every city had their own unique line-up.

 

[Willie the Duck]

You omit Superman (I). That was the movie that raised expectations. Then the ones you list - none of which where massively successful in their time - lowered them again.

I didn't omit it, I defined my range to exclude it. We aren't disagreeing. Dick Tracy wasn't a good movie, but it wasn't horrible, either, and would have been a perfectly unnoteworthy in the period between (non-inclusive) 1978 and 1989, when comic-inspired movies were forgettable popcorn fare.

I wonder if some things that came out in the 60s and early 70s might be more familiar to the kids of the late 70s early 80s than to those when they first came out.

Did original release in 60s and early 70s only give you two chances ever to catch it? (Release night and then one replay after the regular season). And then they were during prime time and had to compete with bed time and parents viewing choices.

In the 70s and early 80s (for midsize cities anyway), the fourth channel/independent stations filled their schedule with nothing but reruns. I got Dick Van Dyke and I Love Lucy five days a week after school. The big thing here might be if every city had their own unique line-up.

Certainly anything on opposite what the one TV the household likely had (Munsters died because it was opposite Batman). Or the latest viewing hour of primetime ("10, 9 central") when the kids might be in bed.

As for decades-past re-runs on 4th stations/UHF/cable (I remember a lot of Lassie and Dennis the Menace reruns on Nickelodeon before they had their own programming), I suspect it depended on how popular they were at the time. A popular show like I Love Lucy, itself relatively family-friendly fare, back when there were 3 channels -- I just kinda suspect that a large slice of kids did watch it bitd, enough to outweigh 70/80s latchkey kids catching it on channel 13 or the like. But I bet a lot of less-popular-at-initial-run shows it is opposite. Certainly Star Trek takes the prize for this, although the turnaround on how quickly it became a juggernaut in syndication might not fit your model.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I don't know how old you two are, but I was born in the 70s roughly a full decade after it was cancelled, and The Addams Family television show was a staple of daytime television while I was growing up. The majority of teenagers who went to see the movie in 1991 were familiar with the property because they watched the show when they were younger. Contrast that with Dick Tracy, I doubt any of the teenagers who went to see it had seen the Dick Tracy serials from the 30s, the movie from the 40s, and I bet a lot of them had never read the comic. Dick Tracy was out of date and out of touch, but The Addams Family wasn't.

Oh, and The Addams Family gave us one of the best pinball games ever!

Same here - new shows on TV were frequently interspersed with old ones - The Munsters, I Dream of Jeannie, Dennis the Menace, Star Trek TOS, Adam West's Batman. Part of that was syndication, but it was also that the previous generation has a habit of passing on/inflicting their favorites on the next generation. And eventually it cycles out if that momentum isn't maintained. For example, my grandma loved Prince Valiant and The Phantom, but by the time that movies were made about them in the 90s, the reception of those characters was...tepid.

 

[RealAlHazred]

When we're talking Pulp movies, there's movies based on actual Pulp characters, and then movies inspired by Pulp characters that use the elements of Pulp -- call them Retropulp. It's an important distinction because it's a lot harder to remove elements that are considered problematic today that weren't when the property was new, as opposed to just creating a new Pulp property without any of those elements at all. Some characters had fewer problematic elements, so those were the ones that got adapted in the wave of 90s Pulp: The Shadow, Dick Tracy, The Phantom, these properties weren't as saddled with the elements as other properties. Doc Savage didn't get remade then probably because he is weighed down with those: surgical mind control, exploitation of indigenous cultures, etc.

Contrast that with the Retropulp characters of Buckaroo Banzai, the Rocketeer and Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (all of which I thought were really good) -- they've got homages, but an effort has been made to make them sanitary "out of the box." They're maybe not as exciting as the older characters but they've also got loads less history -- if they had a chance to develop that history, that background, they'd probably work just as well if not better. But the landscape is different today. The producers seem to only want blockbuster properties, so those are the only ones that get sequels.

 

[Undrave]

Same here - new shows on TV were frequently interspersed with old ones - The Munsters, I Dream of Jeannie, Dennis the Menace, Star Trek TOS, Adam West's Batman. Part of that was syndication, but it was also that the previous generation has a habit of passing on/inflicting their favorites on the next generation. And eventually it cycles out if that momentum isn't maintained. For example, my grandma loved Prince Valiant and The Phantom, but by the time that movies were made about them in the 90s, the reception of those characters was...tepid.

Oh yeah, I remember watching Batman '66 and BnW Zorro back in the 80s, and in the 90's discovering the Thunderbirds and other work of Gerry Anderson, and also Bewitched, I Dream of Jeannie, Giligan's Island...

I feel like the domination of streaming is cutting a lot of kids from discovering past entertainment they might have enjoyed. There's a LOT more content to consume now, but the loss of the syndication culture feels like a shame, because it means you have less cultural connection with other generations. It's interesting though that there is some movement to bring that sort of connection back: Columbo is becoming a folk hero online and I know PushingUpRoses on Youtube has a long running series about Murder She Wrote so it's not ALL lost.

Simulcasting of anime, for exemple, is one heck of a double edged swords. It fun to be up to date and share excitement with fans, but SO many people won't bother watching even a show from a previous SEASON, let alone a previous DECADE, just to keep up with the discussions online that it's crazy.

then movies inspired by Pulp characters that use the elements of Pulp -- call them Retropulp.

I think Repropulp would fit better, since it's a REPROduction.

 

[Ryujin]

When we're talking Pulp movies, there's movies based on actual Pulp characters, and then movies inspired by Pulp characters that use the elements of Pulp -- call them Retropulp. It's an important distinction because it's a lot harder to remove elements that are considered problematic today that weren't when the property was new, as opposed to just creating a new Pulp property without any of those elements at all. Some characters had fewer problematic elements, so those were the ones that got adapted in the wave of 90s Pulp: The Shadow, Dick Tracy, The Phantom, these properties weren't as saddled with the elements as other properties. Doc Savage didn't get remade then probably because he is weighed down with those: surgical mind control, exploitation of indigenous cultures, etc.

Contrast that with the Retropulp characters of Buckaroo Banzai, the Rocketeer and Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (all of which I thought were really good) -- they've got homages, but an effort has been made to make them sanitary "out of the box." They're maybe not as exciting as the older characters but they've also got loads less history -- if they had a chance to develop that history, that background, they'd probably work just as well if not better. But the landscape is different today. The producers seem to only want blockbuster properties, so those are the only ones that get sequels.

A friend developed an alternate 1920s/1930s world for just that reason; to have something that's free of those problematic elements. Ford, Edison, Tesla, and the like back the forces of good. Aleister Crowley is the BBEG. Heroes come from all nations and walks of life.

Everything from the two-fisted WWI veteran airship captain, to the cursed undying itinerant former boxer who's now a servant of an ancient Pharaoh. Former colonies are free. Indigenous peoples are self governing, but still part of larger nations. It's the past that he wishes had happened, played out in the way of 1930s pulp novels and radio plays. It's called "Airship Daedalus."

There are six novels following the main characters on Daedalus, two anthologies with other authors kicking in their characters and stories in the same sandbox, online comics, a series of "radio plays" you can listen to online, and a RPG. I've never played the RPG but I've thoroughly enjoyed the books and radio plays. The radio plays just recently hit Dramafy and, the last time Todd checked, was trending at #2 on that service.

Real retro, or "retropulp", I'll take it all. Sure, sometimes the old stuff needs to be consumed with a heaping helping of salt, but it's still part of history.

 

[Ryujin]

Oh yeah, I remember watching Batman '66 and BnW Zorro back in the 80s, and in the 90's discovering the Thunderbirds and other work of Gerry Anderson, and also Bewitched, I Dream of Jeannie, Giligan's Island...

I feel like the domination of streaming is cutting a lot of kids from discovering past entertainment they might have enjoyed. There's a LOT more content to consume now, but the loss of the syndication culture feels like a shame, because it means you have less cultural connection with other generations. It's interesting though that there is some movement to bring that sort of connection back: Columbo is becoming a folk hero online and I know PushingUpRoses on Youtube has a long running series about Murder She Wrote so it's not ALL lost.

Simulcasting of anime, for exemple, is one heck of a double edged swords. It fun to be up to date and share excitement with fans, but SO many people won't bother watching even a show from a previous SEASON, let alone a previous DECADE, just to keep up with the discussions online that it's crazy.


I think Repropulp would fit better, since it's a REPROduction.

There may yet be hope for those old shows that you could watch on some obscure UHF channel, back in the '70s and '80s. The free streaming services, like Tubi and Roku, need cheap content. As a result many of those old shows are being revived and put online. For example Tubi has the old Batman and Captain Marvel serials, The Addams Family, and many others.