Does anyone else like the legacy characters more than the original ones?

[Uncanny Mutie]

I'm sure quite a few people love Wally more than Barry.

Also, give me almost ANY other Earth Lantern besides Hal...

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

I don't see calling them "sidekicks" as a term of endearment and respect,if not "legacy".i can deal with junior partners, but not sidekicks thing. It always felt like a way to condescend towards the titans narrative . It is precisely why i hate this notion that jl is be and end all of dc in universe and out of it.

And not only that, but the attitude that the Silver Age "originals" are just inherently better than their legacies has, IMO, done damage to the DC brand. This is especially evident when we talk about the Titans. In the 80s, the Titans was DC's best-selling team book or even just their best-selling title in general, far outcompeting the JLA. The Titans were literally neck-and-neck sales wise with the X-Men. And now, they even have a successful and well-recieved show on DC's own streaming app that is a love letter to the Titans comics. The Titans are a proven franchise with proven value.

So they need to stop doing everything they can to sideline and diminish those characters. No more criminal Wally West. No more amnesiac Dick Grayson. No more trying to make Deathstroke into a Batman villain when he's a Titans villain at heart.

Once barry and hal returned I dropped both comics and never went back!

This, I think, is the other extreme. I mean, Geoff Johns crafted some awesome and operatic storylines during his Green Lantern run, some of which I'd say are among DC's best stories. Hal being the lead doesn't make them any less good, especially when the other Earth Lanterns play key parts.

[SiegePerilous02]

I don't see calling them "sidekicks" as a term of endearment and respect,if not "legacy".i can deal with junior partners, but not sidekicks thing. It always felt like a way to condescend towards the titans narrative . It is precisely why i hate this notion that jl is be and end all of dc in universe and out of it.

I think sidekicks is a ok term for them, because that is precisely what they started out as. It's basically just short hand for the Fab 5 when they were Robin, Wonder Girl, Kid Flash, Speedy and Aqualad. Nobody really calls them sidekicks in earnest when they are young adults, and legacy isn't really applicable to any of them besides Wally. They are after all roughly only 10 or so years younger than their mentors and have identities somewhat distinct from them. or try to anyway, only Nightwing really succeeds some of the time.

[Lee]

And not only that, but the attitude that the Silver Age "originals" are just inherently better than their legacies has, IMO, done damage to the DC brand. This is especially evident when we talk about the Titans. In the 80s, the Titans was DC's best-selling team book or even just their best-selling title in general, far outcompeting the JLA. The Titans were literally neck-and-neck sales wise with the X-Men. And now, they even have a successful and well-recieved show on DC's own streaming app that is a love letter to the Titans comics. The Titans are a proven franchise with proven value.

Titans became a hit when it stopped being primarily about sidekicks. Starfire, Raven, Cyborg and Beast Boy are now more synonymous with the Titans brand than Speedy and Kid Flash.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Titans became a hit when it stopped being primarily about sidekicks. Starfire, Raven, Cyborg and Beast Boy are now more synonymous with the Titans brand than Speedy and Kid Flash.

Yet Wally, Donna, and Dick were all key members of the New Teen Titans and Roy and Garth frequently guest-starred in the title...

Plus, there's also the fact that they haven't been "sidekicks" for quite some time.

[BohemiaDrinker]

Sure. Wally is the real deal to me, for once.

I'd take any other Green Lantern over Jordan (but that has more to do with a dislike for Jordan than any particular fondness for the others).

I like Dick way more than I like Bruce (even though I believe he works best in a world where Bruce is Batman).

I love both Tim and Damian as Robins, and even though Wally is my speedster, I may like Bart better than I like Barry (would have to think a little bit on this one).

And Cass is obviously and undoubtedly THE COOLEST CHARACTER TO EVER WEAR BAT SYMBOL and I will fight whoever says otherwise. (I like Dick a little bit more, but Cass is cooler).

In other cases, it varies. Love Connor, but prefer Ollie, for instance. Love the Superman legacies as much as Superman, but not more. And so on.

[Masterff]

I think sidekicks is a ok term for them, because that is precisely what they started out as. It's basically just short hand for the Fab 5 when they were Robin, Wonder Girl, Kid Flash, Speedy and Aqualad. Nobody really calls them sidekicks in earnest when they are young adults, and legacy isn't really applicable to any of them besides Wally. They are after all roughly only 10 or so years younger than their mentors and have identities somewhat distinct from them. or try to anyway, only Nightwing really succeeds some of the time.

In Titans of Tomorrow Bart,Conner,Cassie,Tim.. became Flash,Superman,Wonder Woman,Batman...so you also can call them Legacy characters.

And Legacy means for me only to be RELATED to them, so far that you can be their successor.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

What I think DC and the fanbase both need to understand is that there is literally no reason for pitting the legacy characters against their (former) mentors or vice versa. It honestly makes no sense. The very concept of legacy is built into DC's DNA because almost all of their heroes got sidekicks relatively early in the publisher's history. Robin debuted literally one year after Batman. So obviously, those sidekicks became hugely important characters because of their roles in the main heroes' books and after so many years in publication, those kids had to grow up so they did and did it naturally.

But, just because they did doesn't mean the progenitors are "old." That kind of thinking is reductive, short-sighted, and honestly a bit ageist. As if life ends at 40. After all, just because Peter Parker grew up in the comics, does that mean Tony Stark and Reed Richards are "old" too?? No. Obviously not, even though they were adults before he became one.

The point of this, I guess, is that there is no need for one generation to replace the other. Nor is there any need to reclaim anything. Do I like Wally West more than Barry Allen? Yes. Does that mean I dislike Barry or think it was a bad idea to bring him back? No. What I think is a bad idea is pursuing the ideology that there isn't room for Wally West in a DCU with Barry Allen or vice versa. The same thing applies to Dick Grayson and Bruce Wayne. This isn't Highlander.

On top of that, the Green Lantern franchise thrives when there is more than one protagonist. I don't want to see just Hal, but I also don't want to see just Kyle or just John or just Guy or just Simon and Jessica. I want to see all of them. That's what makes the Green Lantern franchise interesting.

Heroes growing their "families" to incorporate new members and heroes and pass on the lessons of what it means to be a hero. That's what DC is all about.

[manwhohaseverything]

I think sidekicks is a ok term for them, because that is precisely what they started out as. It's basically just short hand for the Fab 5 when they were Robin, Wonder Girl, Kid Flash, Speedy and Aqualad. Nobody really calls them sidekicks in earnest when they are young adults, and legacy isn't really applicable to any of them besides Wally. They are after all roughly only 10 or so years younger than their mentors and have identities somewhat distinct from them. or try to anyway, only Nightwing really succeeds some of the time.

I wasn't just talking about first gen. So? Superman used to have a police badge with s as his shield.things change. Just because something or someone starts out with a name doesn't make it ok to call it/him/her that during a different period, where the audience or society has changed. Junior partners or just partners is much more exceptable term in my view. Its my personal opinion because i view titans narrative far superior to anything the silverage mainstays can come up with. Come on, these are kids who should be living normal lives, going to school, worrying about girls/boys or grades. Instead, they have to carry the burden of fighting the monsters from the abyss.

Compare that to, some 30 year old well balanced, figured out guys/gals fighting on some self-righteous mission. It's night and day for me Which one is more compelling. No offence, i am not trying to be ageist or anything. All i am saying is that i would be more sad,if a teen or a kid dies/gets injured severely(like barbara for example) during their so called "superheroic adventures" than someone like bruce, clark or hal had. It would be more of a tragedy for me.

[lucius121]

I find most of the original heroes to be rather boring, with the exception of Batman I’ve tried to read Wonder Woman and Superman a number of times but I find the black and white simplistic morality frustrating, this is also why I’m not a fan of Dick and Donna, I prefer Cassie and Tim, forBatgirl I prefer Cass over Bette, Red arrow I prefer Emiko (non-TT Emiko).

[manwhohaseverything]

I find most of the original heroes to be rather boring, with the exception of Batman I’ve tried to read Wonder Woman and Superman a number of times but I find the black and white simplistic morality frustrating, this is also why I’m not a fan of Dick and Donna, I prefer Cassie and Tim, forBatgirl I prefer Cass over Bette, Red arrow I prefer Emiko (non-TT Emiko).

Batman doesn't the view in world in simplistic black and white morality . Since, when? He practically kicked jason ass to a pulp for supposedly killing the penguin. Dude, bruce is the most rigid one out of all three of them. Clark whines, bargains, then backs off and accepts things. Wonder woman is pretty chill will let go certain things for the greater good. But, man does bruce stay in his self righteous position and never backs down. And have never seen dick being that rigid in my reads.

[Jim Kelly]

Other than Captain America and Namor, I don't think there's any Marvel characters created before 1960 that's held in as high a regard as those from the 1960s and 1970s. We don't even question this bias--it just seems natural. Yet if DC has a bias toward their characters created at the same time as Marvel's, that's suspect?

I get it. National Comics was a much bigger company than Timely Comics (DC and Marvel respectively). And they produced a heck of a lot more in the 1940s and 1950s--plus they've acquired a lot of other characters from defunct publishers. However, since it's essentially the same fanbase and the same creative base that both companies were built upon since 1960, it stands to reason that if Marvel has a '60s/'70s bias then so does DC--because it's the same exact people who have read and then made both.

[lucius121]

Batman doesn't the view in world in simplistic black and white morality . Since, when? He practically kicked jason ass to a pulp for supposedly killing the penguin. Dude, bruce is the most rigid one out of all three of them. Clark whines, bargains, then backs off and accepts things. Wonder woman is pretty chill will let go certain things for the greater good. But, man does bruce stay in his self righteous position and never backs down. And have never seen dick being that rigid in my reads.

Bruce has one rule no killing aside from that he’s pretty much does what needs to be done, Superman and Wonder Woman spend a lot of time pretending to be spotless paragons of virtue, and their books even now seem that way, for me that very boring. Dick has this thing about being Bruce without the darkness (at least before) and most of the times I have read his book or Titans that pure good choir boy (who every woman wants to screw) image was kind of ridiculous and not entertaining for me.

[manwhohaseverything]

Other than Captain America and Namor, I don't think there's any Marvel characters created before 1960 that's held in as high a regard as those from the 1960s and 1970s. We don't even question this bias--it just seems natural. Yet if DC has a bias toward their characters created at the same time as Marvel's, that's suspect?

I get it. National Comics was a much bigger company than Timely Comics (DC and Marvel respectively). And they produced a heck of a lot more in the 1940s and 1950s--plus they've acquired a lot of other characters from defunct publishers. However, since it's essentially the same fanbase and the same creative base that both companies were built upon since 1960, it stands to reason that if Marvel has a '60s/'70s bias then so does DC--because it's the same exact people who have read and then made both.

The difference is marvel doesn't try to bury things, actively that doesn't come from the era you mentioned and have gotten popular (as far as, i am knowledgeable). You yourself have included the likes of cap and namor. Cap is pretty much popular as ever now. They don't say "nope! fantastic four should be the one that is more popular " and bury cap. I mean, marvel always had a better balanced approach to these things compared to dc.Marvel's creates wayyy less batgods, supergarystues or Unbeatable harleys.marvel doesn't say that the original human torch didn't exist like dc did with teams like the jsa. Heck! There was even an easter egg of him in the cap:first avenger.

The so called "sidekicks" are treated like something that is just there now. Look, how dick is turned to "ric" and the state of wally west. These characters don't need to be pushed hard, just need to be treated decently. The titans reunion during rebirth was basically aimless because they were not allowed to be part of the bigger plot. And then they used jl to disband them.

The problem isn't dc management has a bias. The problem is their bias makes them bury characters, in favour of their preferred ones. That is not needed at all.

[SiegePerilous02]

In Titans of Tomorrow Bart,Conner,Cassie,Tim.. became Flash,Superman,Wonder Woman,Batman...so you also can call them Legacy characters.

And Legacy means for me only to be RELATED to them, so far that you can be their successor.

Well that's kind of the issue, nobody can agree on a set definition for the term.

I wouldn't call a what if scenario/Elseworld story a solid reason to call any of them legacies of Flash, Superman, Wonder Woman or Batman. We all know the latter three will never be replaced in canon, and there is no reason to be. Tim though, for example, is a legacy of Dick because he's wearing an identity Dick originated.

I wasn't just talking about first gen. So? Superman used to have a police badge with s as his shield.things change. Just because something or someone starts out with a name doesn't make it ok to call it/him/her that during a different period, where the audience or society has changed. Junior partners or just partners is much more exceptable term in my view. Its my personal opinion because i view titans narrative far superior to anything the silverage mainstays can come up with. Come on, these are kids who should be living normal lives, going to school, worrying about girls/boys or grades. Instead, they have to carry the burden of fighting the monsters from the abyss.

Compare that to, some 30 year old well balanced, figured out guys/gals fighting on some self-righteous mission. It's night and day for me Which one is more compelling. No offence, i am not trying to be ageist or anything. All i am saying is that i would be more sad,if a teen or a kid dies/gets injured severely(like barbara for example) during their so called "superheroic adventures" than someone like bruce, clark or hal had. It would be more of a tragedy for me.

I really don't see how the term sidekick ever went out of style. it's better than calling them child soldiers and making this a little too real lol. They definitely shouldn't be called that when they branch out on their own, but when Robin is just starting out? Sidekick is what he is, and there is really no shame in it. Especially since when he's in the Batman books, he isn't the lead.

I love the original Titans group narrative for them as a whole, and Dick and Wally are some of DC's best characters. But in my opinion, I don't know if I'd rank them above the Golden/Silver agers. There is just way more material for the latter group. Donna in particular has NTT going for her, but that is her major claim to fame and she was part of an ensemble. That really can't compete with Diana, whose franchise doesn't really utilize Donna that much to begin with.