Gaiman Eppy Titbit
- Thread starter StCoop
- Start date
People know films. People know monetary stats. People do not know Richard Curtis. People don't refer to it as "Richard Curtis' Love, Actually". He's not a household name. Gaiman isn't either. But, people would know him faster than Curtis, because there is a "Neil Gaiman's The Sandman". "Neil Gaiman's American Gods". There's something to be said for being a literary pop-culture icon, versus a guy that made a few movies...
Well, first off, Curtis is a bit more famous than you're making him out to sound like in Britain. Just look up his Wikipedia article -- between his films, his TV shows, and Comic Relief, the man is fairly famous there.
Second, again, I think you're vastly over-estimating the number of people who know Gaiman versus the number of people who know Curtis. Even if he's not a household name, the sheer number of people who saw his films means that the number of people who do know who Richard Curtis is probably outnumbers the number of people in geek circles who know who Gaiman is.
I'd be much more comfortable betting that more people know who Richard Curtis is than Neil Gaiman.
Not every children's book out there makes Harry Potter numbers. How many bestseller lists did Gaiman make?
But, if you remember, I'm only talking America. I wouldn't presume to guess what he's like for the Brits. In America, Neil Gaiman is a pop-culture icon. He is one of the personifications of 1990 media and pop-culture, much like Kurt Cobain and The X-Files. He's the literary rockstar.
Well, that's your call, but I have yet to see any logical evidence to convince me...
But, if you remember, I'm only talking America. I wouldn't presume to guess what he's like for the Brits. In America, Neil Gaiman is a pop-culture icon. He is one of the personifications of 1990 media and pop-culture, much like Kurt Cobain and The X-Files. He's the literary rockstar.
Well, that's your call, but I have yet to see any logical evidence to convince me...
The sheer number of people who've seen his stuff versus the much smaller number of people who've seen Gaiman's stuff doesn't count?
Can't we just split the difference and say to Joe Public when they see "Written by Neil Gaiman" or "Written by Richard Curtis" they won't know or care who either of them are.
Joe Public doesn't know anything about anything.
Then wtf is the argument about?
Once again, they didn't see "his" stuff. They saw "that new movie with Liam Neeson in it", or "Hugh Grant and Julia Robert's marginally successful team-up". If people have read Neil Gaiman's works it's because either they are into comic books already and were there for Sandman, or they are people who have since discovered his other works based on his critical acclaim for said comic legacy.
The trailer for Notting Hill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNBXHp2qbRo
The trailer for Mirror Mask
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GA1iawlsKLg
Neil Gaiman is a name. Richard Curtis is not.
I like both their work, but I'd still come down on the Curtis is a bigger name side of the fence. Anyway, another interview with him. Doesn't really drop any hints apart from saying what the episode was called at one stage, but does say writing Who is a bit like being God...
Not remotely pretentious then eh
Link
Not remotely pretentious then eh
Link
It isn't that surprising. As has been pointed out you often don't care who the writer/producer of a film is and although Neil Gaiman is fairly famous in geek circles I wouldn't have thought he was a well known literary figure in general like a Stephen King or Terry Pratchett...
Similar threads
- Poll
