quote:

I just realized that no one did a "The Batman" set. Why is that? Was the license too expensive or too limiting? That's something you never hear...how much is a license to make Batman cards or anything else? It must be more than mere thousands of dollars. It might be tens of thousands of dollars with limitations. Depending on the limitations, it wouldn't be worth doing even before considering how much it would cost to design/create/pack up/box up the cards and then distribute them.

Probably multiple issues...

Initial Cost
Timing, studios don't like putting images and storyline out before the movie.
Actor involvement, if you can't get Batman to sign can you make a set of it in the current market?

Uncle Allen told me that the studio came to him and wanted Inkworks to do a Pirates of the Caribbean set. He was for it, but wanted a guarantee that at least 1 of the 3 main stars would sign. They wouldn't guarantee it, and no set happened. Opportunity missed? Or safe play because nobody likes a set with just the 2nd tier actors?

Ed

quote:

Originally posted by Scifi Cards:
Initial Cost
Timing, studios don't like putting images and storyline out before the movie.
Actor involvement, if you can't get Batman to sign can you make a set of it in the current markets?

Ed

I don't miss those 72 card sets that ended with the last card in the middle of the movie.

The main cast of "The Batman" was slim pickings. The only actors who might have signed based on past history is Jeffrey Wright, Andy Serkis and Mark Killen. The stars were all very unlikely and the rest of the cast are not "names".

It makes you appreciate what a great job Artbox did with Harry Potter and RA did with Bond. Star Wars and Marvel are well covered to, but in a less structured way. "The Batman" could wind up in a DC mixed package someday. Single themed films will never have a card set anymore (not worth the license) and even franchise titles once in demand (X-Men) have petered out or never got going (Pirates and Jurassic).

quote:

Originally posted by Scifi Cards:
Opportunity missed? Or safe play because nobody likes a set with just the 2nd tier actors?

Hard to say. The only modern era non-sports set I can think of that exploded without the main actor autographs was Twilight. Would Pirates have done as well? We'll never know, but probably not.

You're correct - having main cast sign can make or break a set. No pun intended, but Breaking Bad suffered from this. Personally, I thought it was a great set, but at the time collectors were VERY vocal about their displeasure with Cryptozoic for not getting either of the 2 main actors to sign and box values dropped like a brick.

Breaking Bad was the first set I thought about when comparing to Pirates too.

Breaking Bad was a disaster due to the autograph list -- Obviously the 2 leads were huge misses, but in my mind at the time they only had 1 of what were my top 5 actors -- Anna Gunn. If they would have had Saul or Mike I would have bought some of it. On top of that the best autograph in the set -- Anna Gunn looks significantly different than the rest of the autographs.

Anyway -- with Pirates. . . I think a hobby release would have struggled without some key autographs. It may have been a great retail play, but I have no idea if that would have been possible.