How come Blaze is not Torch?
0
posted07/07/2007 12:25 PM (UTC)by
Avatar
RaisnCain
Avatar
Member Since
04/23/2006 02:34 AM (UTC)
I heard that Blaze is not called Torch because of legal reasons (Trust me I like the name Blaze better). Is it because of human torch from Fantastic Four? Aside from the fact, Blaze has nothing in common with human torch beside being made of fire therefore MK shouldn't have got into legal stuff. They are completely different.

I just can't really remember.
Avatar
Sub-Zero_7th
07/07/2007 01:43 AM (UTC)
0
RaisnCain Wrote:
I heard that Blaze is not called Torch because of legal reasons (Trust me I like the name Blaze better). Is it because of human torch from Fantastic Four? Aside from the fact, Blaze has nothing in common with human torch beside being made of fire therefore MK shouldn't have got into legal stuff. They are completely different.

I just can't really remember.


Yes, it has to do with the Human Torch. Even if they are different, there would still be problems.
Avatar
Jerrod
Avatar
About Me
MKO Moderator, Story Writer, Actor
Signature by Pred
07/07/2007 01:47 AM (UTC)
0
You basically answered your own question; maybe Midway just didn't want to take the risk of creating a character named Torch who looked like The Human Torch? I know I wouldn't want to if I was in their position. There were other designs for Blaze shown in MK:DA's Krypt that would've been better and would've strengthened your argument more about the characters being too different for any legal issues, but as it stands, I don't think Midway wanted to start anything over a last-minute bonus character.
Avatar
RaisnCain
07/07/2007 02:09 AM (UTC)
0
Jerrod Wrote:
You basically answered your own question; maybe Midway just didn't want to take the risk of creating a character named Torch who looked like The Human Torch? I know I wouldn't want to if I was in their position. There were other designs for Blaze shown in MK:DA's Krypt that would've been better and would've strengthened your argument more about the characters being too different for any legal issues, but as it stands, I don't think Midway wanted to start anything over a last-minute bonus character.


I really didn't remember, lol. I guess I did answer it. I just wanted more background info about it, which I got.

You see, I am writing a novel that has a character named Grievous. He has four arms and is a swordsman. I am too, afraid that, he might be too similar to Grievous from Star Wars. However, I have ways to fight it.

My Grievous is from Hell, or the Underworld and is a demon monster. He learned everything from Satan himself. He has different supernatural powers. He too, is similar to Goro in his story.

Star War's Grievous is a droid with human traits and is a jedi/sith, which are swordsman.

Either way, I don't think I can get into trouble.
Gerneral Grievous was not a Jedi or Sith, nor can he use the force. He killed Jedi, and took their lightsabers as trophys.



Ka-Tra
Avatar
RaisnCain
07/07/2007 12:25 PM (UTC)
0
Tetra_Vega Wrote:
Gerneral Grievous was not a Jedi or Sith, nor can he use the force. He killed Jedi, and took their lightsabers as trophys.



Ka-Tra


Ah yes, I forgot. Thanks Tetra.
Pages: 1
Discord
Twitch
Twitter
YouTube
Facebook
Privacy Policy
© 1998-2025 Shadow Knight Media, LLC. All rights reserved. Mortal Kombat, the dragon logo and all character names are trademarks and copyright of Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.