What made Spider-Man so popular?

[Ozymandias]

Remember, that in the 1940s, Fawcett's Captain Marvel actually outsold Superman, and he was the biggest superhero in comics in that time. Captain Marvel aka Billy Batson was the guy. Captain Marvel also flew in comics before Superman did, Marvel also had other stuff that Superman copied (not coincidentally DC hired Otto Binder, writer of the Fawcett stuff to DC).

So the idea that Spider-Man occupied a third space that others couldn't claim doesn't track.

Being someone who pointed that out, maybe not that someone, I can't agree. Spider-Man wasn't Captain Marvel. CM was just as "super" as Superman. Spider-Man was powered, but not so much that it wouldn't make sense to pit him against regular criminals.

We also need to keep in mind, that Batman in that era wasn't really a "street-level" character. Batman in the 40s and 50s largely was an oversized adventurer fighting grandiose comic book schemes. We also need to remember that until Tim Burton's 1989 Batman, Bruce Wayne's primary mode of traversal was the Batmobile. The modern idea we have of a "street-level vigilante" i.e. a dude who slouches on rooftrops and parkours across the city was something Spider-Man and Daredevil both did far before Batman.

But still, as you said, he was a guy who heavily relied on gadgets to do what he couldn't, because he lacked powers. And despite how grandiose their schemes, his opponents weren't usually powered, or were they? I haven't read much of 40's and 50's Batman, and what I did was decades ago.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Being someone who pointed that out, maybe not that someone, I can't agree. Spider-Man wasn't Captain Marvel. CM was just as "super" as Superman. Spider-Man was powered, but not so much that it wouldn't make sense to pit him against regular criminals.

Captain Marvel was a small kid who transformed into a super-being by saying a magic word. And as the Captain Marvel Family grew and expanded you did have others who were teenagers transformed into older superpowers (such as Captain Marvel JR. who actually inspired Elvis Presley's stage costume, that white-suit and cape look and the hairstyle). Billy Batson was possibly the first "Hero who could be you" since that was a case of a small kid directly becoming a superhero unlike Robin who wore an embarrassing kid costume while being Batman's caddy.

But still, as you said, he was a guy who heavily relied on gadgets to do what he couldn't, because he lacked powers. And despite how grandiose their schemes, his opponents weren't usually powered, or were they?

Some of them were aliens (Think of "The Batman of Zu-En-Arh"), and quite a few had powers and mega-tech (The Rainbow Batman). And some of the stories were out-there interdimensional alternate universe stories including "To kill a legend" (maybe my all-time favorite Batman story). It was all giant props and wacky colors...which gave the Batman comics a unique aesthetic (one which surprisingly translated successful on TV as in the Adam West show, which as I mentioned, remains to this day a defining version of Batman).

It isn't "street-level" as we understand that term to mean. If we understand "Street-level" to be grounded, realistic and believable than the model for that in the '40s was Eisner's The Spirit, which was a newspaper comic strip where the main hero was just an abstract figure and the hook of the stories were one-shot characters who were tangentially connected to the hero's adventures. No superhero comic was anywhere close to that in the 40s and 50s. The Spirit because it was a newspaper strip targeted an adult readership that kids comics didn't have, so Eisner could do stuff like say showing character deaths, and proto-deconstructive flourishes, sexuality and other hot topics. What we understand as "Street-Level" was stuff from the the '80s...Miller's Daredevil, V For Vendetta, Rorschach in Watchmen, and so on.

[Uncanny Mutie]

He was different from the other big names of Marvel and DC at the time, you could say he was a lot like Bat-Man (no killing, no special powers, analytical and very smart) and Superman (modest upbringing, super strength, newspaper/media job) and his snarky/jokester personality he donned while dealing with his rogues made him standout from other big name heroes. He was a nice third option for people who weren't into Bat-Man or Superman, or Captain America or Hulk. I'm gonna get meta for a moment here and also say that the Spidey merchandise definitely helped drive interest in the character over the years, even when he didn't have a major comic event or movie coming out, the Spider-Man brand always had a pretty strong market.

Basically, he's a mascot character with a cool design to reel in new fans, but he also happens to have really good stories for people that actually want to read the comics.

It also helps that his power set makes him a pretty adaptable hero. Whether he's fighting regular humans or OP aliens with the Avengers, the story can be written in a way where you can see him realistically struggle but still come out on top. He's strong but without being too OP.

However, as someone else pointed out, I think it was also the fact that Spider-Man represented the "third option" that wasn't captured by Superman and Batman. Almost every character before him was either a Superman-level character like Captain Marvel or Wonder Woman or a Batman-level character like Green Arrow or Captain America. And, honestly, who could realistically become an icon in either of those two spheres when Superman and Batman already filled those roles? Spider-Man, however, was the "hybrid" that had powers like Superman but could still realistically operate as a street-level character like Batman. In other words, he occupied in the space between the two in a way that was almost unprecedented.

This is the key to Spider-Man's success, IMO, and why he has always been my favorite superhero: With Superman and Batman being the other two most popular superheroes and both being on opposite ends of the spectrum---Superman being so OP that he can easily get boring and Batman not having any super powers at all which kinda takes the "super" out of superhero for him---Spider-Man fits very nicely right in the middle. He has a power set that's fun enough to fuel fans' and readers' desire for wish fulfillment and escapism, but he's not so powerful in comparison to most of the threats he faces and not so far removed from humanity that he becomes boring or too formulaic.

The cool, unique, timeless design and all the relateable, down to Earth aspects of his origin and his personality are just the icing on the cake, IMO.

[Uncanny Mutie]

We also need to keep in mind, that Batman in that era wasn't really a "street-level" character. Batman in the 40s and 50s largely was an oversized adventurer fighting grandiose comic book schemes. We also need to remember that until Tim Burton's 1989 Batman, Bruce Wayne's primary mode of traversal was the Batmobile. The modern idea we have of a "street-level vigilante" i.e. a dude who slouches on rooftrops and parkours across the city was something Spider-Man and Daredevil both did far before Batman.

In fact, you could argue that was an element where Batman took inspiration from Spider-Man (and Daredevil, specifically Miller Daredevil). That's something people rarely talk about, the influence Spider-Man had on other comics.

EXCELLENT points that I never hear many people bring up. These days, Batman gets held up as the poster child of street level vigilante superheros, but Spider-Man and even Daredevil were swinging and leaping from rooftops and crouching on Gargoyles long before Batman was doing it consistently. Spidey was DEFINITELY doing it years before Batman, who was spending most of his time zooming around in the Batmobile. But when people talk about how Frank Miller came along and revolutionized and "darkened up" Batman in 1986's The Dark Knight Returns, I always tell people that Frank Miller was already doing the same thing with Daredevil in the late 70s and early 80s before he even started working on Batman. What Miller did with Batman in '86 was actually more like a continuation or progression of a lot of the same ideas he had already implemented earlier on Daredevil.

[Chubistian]

EXCELLENT points that I never hear many people bring up. These days, Batman gets held up as the poster child of street level vigilante superheros, but Spider-Man and even Daredevil were swinging and leaping from rooftops and crouching on Gargoyles long before Batman was doing it consistently. Spidey was DEFINITELY doing it years before Batman, who was spending most of his time zooming around in the Batmobile. But when people talk about how Frank Miller came along and revolutionized and "darkened up" Batman in 1986's The Dark Knight Returns, I always tell people that Frank Miller was already doing the same thing with Daredevil in the late 70s and early 80s before he even started working on Batman. What Miller did with Batman in '86 was actually more like a continuation or progression of a lot of the same ideas he had already implemented earlier on Daredevil.

Batman was a street level vigilante in his conception and first adventures. It was a pretty consistent trait of his that wouldn't get diluted until years later. He was swinging from rooftops long before Spidey and DD were born as concepts. And though it's true that the revitalization Miller did with Batman was applied years earlier to DD, many of Batman fundamental traits were already back thank to writers like Dennis O'neil and pencillers like Neal Adams long before Miller ever touched the character.

[Uncanny Mutie]

Batman was a street level vigilante in his conception and first adventures. It was a pretty consistent trait of his that wouldn't get diluted until years later. He was swinging from rooftops long before Spidey and DD were born as concepts.

I didn't say he NEVER swung from rooftops. Of course he did. Heck, the cover of Batman #1 back in 1940 depicted him and Robin swinging. He just wasn't doing it as consistently as Spidey and DD, especially by the time they came along. In Batman's very first appearances, he was riding around town in a car (the Batmobile was just a regular red car back then) shooting people with a gun. So yeah, that definitely could be considered street level, just not in the way that people consider the average superhero to be street level these days, which seemed to be more consistently depicted with Spidey---and to a lesser extent, Daredevil---first.

And though it's true that the revitalization Miller did with Batman was applied years earlier to DD, many of Batman fundamental traits were already back thank to writers like Dennis O'neil and pencillers like Neal Adams long before Miller ever touched the character.

Right. That's why I said that MILLER'S take on Batman and the way he wrote him was basically just continuing and progressing the way he wrote Daredevil before he ever even worked on Batman. If people are going to give Miller credit for his take on Batman, then acknowledge that he was doing the same thing with Daredevil FIRST.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Remember, that in the 1940s, Fawcett's Captain Marvel actually outsold Superman, and he was the biggest superhero in comics in that time. Captain Marvel aka Billy Batson was the guy. Captain Marvel also flew in comics before Superman did, Marvel also had other stuff that Superman copied (not coincidentally DC hired Otto Binder, writer of the Fawcett stuff to DC).

Basically what Oz said. However, it's worth noting I think that outselling doesn't necessarily translate to replacing. Captain Marvel may have outsold Superman at one point, but he never supplanted his place in the pop-culture zeitgeist. Likewise, there are many characters who outsell Superman's comics today, but almost none of them are anywhere as revered as Superman. In the end, Captain Marvel, despite his differences from Superman, ended up still being compared and contrasted against Superman because they were still very similar. Heck, that's why DC ended up suing Fawcett and eventually winning.

We also need to keep in mind, that Batman in that era wasn't really a "street-level" character. Batman in the 40s and 50s largely was an oversized adventurer fighting grandiose comic book schemes. We also need to remember that until Tim Burton's 1989 Batman, Bruce Wayne's primary mode of traversal was the Batmobile. The modern idea we have of a "street-level vigilante" i.e. a dude who slouches on rooftrops and parkours across the city was something Spider-Man and Daredevil both did far before Batman.

In fact, you could argue that was an element where Batman took inspiration from Spider-Man (and Daredevil, specifically Miller Daredevil). That's something people rarely talk about, the influence Spider-Man had on other comics.

Batman's roots were as a street-level character. The Golden Age showed the character as a street-level vigilante that stuck to the shadows and dark alleyways. That's something that has always been a part of the character. And it was also a part of himself that he'd returned to waaaaay before Frank Miller ever came onto the character. Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams had already brought Batman back to his dark, street-level roots facing the League of Assassins over a decade before Frank Miller even though to write Daredevil fighting the Hand.

Also, Spider-Man and Daredevil did not do any of that stuff before Batman did. Batman was swinging from rooftops at night long before Peter came along. In fact, the covers for Detective Comics #27 and Amazing Fantasy #15 show that Spider-Man probably took inspiration from Batman, not the other way around:




One of those came before the other (hint: it wasn't Spider-Man). There were even panels from Silver Age Batman comics that poked fun at the situation, one, in particular, that had Batman breaking the fourth wall by straight-up saying: "I was swinging from rooftops long before some Peter-come-lately."

But that's not a knock on Spider-Man because of course all art draws inspiration from other artists and other stories. However, let's not write off the influence that Batman had in shaping the concept of the street-level hero.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Right. That's why I said that MILLER'S take on Batman and the way he wrote him was basically just continuing and progressing the way he wrote Daredevil before he ever even worked on Batman. If people are going to give Miller credit for his take on Batman, then acknowledge that he was doing the same thing with Daredevil FIRST.

I remember reading an article/interview not long ago where Frank Miller basically said that he based his Daredevil run on, well, Batman and used Daredevil to tell stories that he wanted to tell with Batman. And that makes sense since he probably grew up reading the latter and planned out stories about what he would do if he ever wrote the character. And that's not to dismiss Daredevil, but that shows that, yes, Batman had a huge influence on shaping who Daredevil (and almost every street-level character) would become.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Basically what Oz said. However, it's worth noting I think that outselling doesn't necessarily translate to replacing. Captain Marvel may have outsold Superman at one point, but he never supplanted his place in the pop-culture zeitgeist. Likewise, there are many characters who outsell Superman's comics today, but almost none of them are anywhere as revered as Superman. In the end, Captain Marvel, despite his differences from Superman, ended up still being compared and contrasted against Superman because they were still very similar. Heck, that's why DC ended up suing Fawcett and eventually winning.

Fawcett lost because they didn’t fight a good case and the parent publisher thought superhero comics were done anyway so they caved to DC. They actually had a good enough case to appeal further and a publisher with more fight could have made it happen. Captain Marvel was and is a substantially different character from Superman. And Superman stole far more from Fawcett than vice versa.

And the other part of this argument is present-ist. You are assuming that Superman in the 40s has the status he now has. He didn’t.

Batman's roots were as a street-level character. The Golden Age showed the character as a street-level vigilante that stuck to the shadows and dark alleyways.

People in the 40s and 50s through the 70s didn’t think of eras as Golden Age or Silver Age. The internet didn’t exist. So aside from a token few, almost nobody among the fans would have remembered the very very early Batman stories. He simply didn’t have the status of street level hero by the early 60s.

Again Batman and Superman, and for that matter Spider-Man, didn’t always have the status and reputation they do today. The internet didn’t exist back then so comics were mostly what was on the stands in that month. So you have to unlearn your perceptions of the characters to understand the context in which they, especially Spider-Man, appeared.

[Uncanny Mutie]

I remember reading an article/interview not long ago where Frank Miller basically said that he based his Daredevil run on, well, Batman and used Daredevil to tell stories that he wanted to tell with Batman. And that makes sense since he probably grew up reading the latter and planned out stories about what he would do if he ever wrote the character. And that's not to dismiss Daredevil, but that shows that, yes, Batman had a huge influence on shaping who Daredevil (and almost every street-level character) would become.

I believe that. CLEARLY Frank Miller really wanted to be writing Batman when he was writing Daredevil. So if anything, I think Miller did a lot of the stuff with Daredevil that he already had envisioned for Batman if and when he ever got the chance to work on Batman, and just transferred it over to Batman once he finally got to write him. So yeah, it's obviously that Miller was strongly influenced by Batman, but the stuff that he brought to Batman from his Daredevil run also deeply influenced Batman and his mythos as well.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Fawcett lost because they didn’t fight a good case and the parent publisher thought superhero comics were done anyway so they caved to DC. They actually had a good enough case to appeal further and a publisher with more fight could have made it happen. Captain Marvel was and is a substantially different character from Superman. And Superman stole far more from Fawcett than vice versa.

And the other part of this argument is present-ist. You are assuming that Superman in the 40s has the status he now has. He didn’t.

But the fact that DC even had grounds to sue in the first place shows how similar the two characters are. And honestly, just looking at them side-by-side, you can tell that they at least fulfill similar archetypes.

Also, dude, Superman became a pop culture phenomenon relatively quickly. Within only a few years, Superman was basically everywhere: radio shows, lunchboxes, serials, a balloon in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade, etc. The way I've always heard it described it to me is that it was like Beatlemania before Beatlemania was a thing.

People in the 40s and 50s through the 70s didn’t think of eras as Golden Age or Silver Age. The internet didn’t exist. So aside from a token few, almost nobody among the fans would have remembered the very very early Batman stories. He simply didn’t have the status of street-level hero by the early 60s.

Uh, Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams did. They've stated that bringing Batman back to his street-level roots was what they wanted to accomplish with their run and that's exactly what they did. And again, that was a decade before Miller even started on Daredevil, let alone Batman.

Again Batman and Superman, and for that matter Spider-Man, didn’t always have the status and reputation they do today. The internet didn’t exist back then so comics were mostly what was on the stands in that month. So you have to unlearn your perceptions of the characters to understand the context in which they, especially Spider-Man, appeared.

Dude, again, Superman and Batman may have debuted before the age of television, but they were pretty much everywhere: merchandise, radio shows, movie serials that kids would go see in the theatres, etc. Then when TV did come along, shows like the George Reeves Superman and Adam West Batman just further cemented their pop-culture hold.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

But the fact that DC even had grounds to sue in the first place shows how similar the two characters are.

By this logic, the author of Gladiator had grounds to sue Superman too. And it doesn't prove anything. My point is that Superman in the 40s didn't have total monopoly on his "archetype" the way you seem to think he did. He was a character who evolved, as did Batman and Spider-Man.

The way I've always heard it described it to me is that it was like Beatlemania before Beatlemania was a thing.

Superman was never ever as big as the Beatles, or Elvis Presley, no superhero comic ever was...nor will they ever be. Elvis and the Beatles were hugely popular among women, easily the biggest demographic in that period, and in a pre-feminist world, many of them were stay at home and so had access to free time that allowed new acts that appealed to them to really grow. Superman and superhero comics in that period by and large targeted a male audience and male consumers, which at that time meant young kids and the emerging teenager (a word that was invented in the '40s by the way). In fact, do you know what the biggest selling comics of the '50s were...it was Carl Barks' Uncle Scrooge comics. Superman or superheroes weren't even the biggest comics in that period. Superhero comics declined in popularity in the 40s and 50s in favor of crime comics, horror comics, romance comics. They competed time and again with different kinds of comics in that period, and other stuff. More than that, comics were never as big or significant as TV or movies, or sports. John Wayne, Bogart, James Dean, and Brando were far bigger and had more impact than any superhero comic did. Heck until the rise of the internet, on a sheer eyeball level, newspaper comics had by far the biggest readership than any monthly ongoing.

Superman was important, his arrival immediately created the superhero genre and inspired many others to develop characters. So yeah, he's a pioneer and founder, but Superman didn't arrive fully formed as we know today and people didn't immediately see him as the paragon or the center of the DC Universe or "the chest symbol means hope" or that he represents an archetype (Early comics readers wouldn't know or use that word). Plus, Superman immediately faced competition who were outperforming him. Captain Marvel by Fawcett had better art and writing (CC Beck and Otto Binder), introduced innovations like the first serialized story and super-villain team up (The Monster Society of Evil), the legacy characters and sidekicks and super-family (Miss Marvel and the Marvel Family), and heck Lex Luthor was himself inspired by Dr. Sivana. It was Captain Marvel that was first adapted to movies in the form of a serial. And Captain Marvel was immensely popular among all people, including GI fighting World War II.

Had Fawcett Comics had better management and so on, more likely we would see Superman in the same way we see say the original Human Torch (totally displaced by Johnny Storm), the Shield (a shield using patriotic hero who came before Captain America socked Hitler) and so on.

Uh, Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams did.

I am talking mainly about the 40s to early 60s. O'Neill and Adams are from the '70s.

They've stated that bringing Batman back to his street-level roots was what they wanted to accomplish with their run and that's exactly what they did.

O'Neill and Adams are most notable for creating Ra's Al Ghul, a 700 year old leader of a secret society who dipped into Lazarus Pits, quickly being recognized as the first Batman villain who was a legitimate world-ender level bad guy and introducing a global scale to his stories. Not street level, my dude. Batman in the '70s was more violent and darker than the '60s certainly, but it was also a period that fluctuated in tones. If anything it was inspired by James Bond


You also see Batman stories inspired by Spider-Man as well. Like in the '70s, Batman lives in a penthouse loft in the city rather than the manor. In Strange Apparitions, Batman angsts about his double life and about how being Batman keeps him from being with Silver St. Cloud in a way that's closer to Peter Parker and his pining for Gwen and MJ than Bruce in any time before and after.

And again, that was a decade before Miller even started on Daredevil, let alone Batman.

Which again neglects or ignores Miller's originality which practically everyone recognized. I mean yeah, violence and murder and death, and great stories with that, was there in Batman comics and also Daredevil before Miller came, but Miller brought a perspective that was radically new. That was recognized instantly from Alan Moore downwards as doing something never before seen in comics at that time. Miller made crime stories more visceral and believable. He made Batman as a fighter on the streets believable and also put details on fighting styles of Daredevil and Elektra and so on.

[Snoop Dogg]

Why is the Spider-Man so popular? Is it because he's relatable? Well, of course he is in a society where the common man is but an insect or an arachnid to those at the top.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Well, of course he is in a society where the common man is but an insect or an arachnid to those at the top.

The real insects to those on top are usually not the common man but the social outsiders -- LGBT people, religious minorities, racial minorities, women and so on. And the X-Men has always spoken to them more than Spider-Man or any other Marvel title.

There is the common man, and then there are the myths we tell ourselves about the common man. In USA, the idea has always been that the common man too can rise up and make it big. There is the cult of individualism, and self-reliance and so on. Spider-Man is in some sense a kind of validation for the common man, or a fantasy. This of course is also true of the Clark Kent/Superman story. But it's hard to impossible to reduce him to that one thing.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

By this logic, the author of Gladiator had grounds to sue Superman too. And it doesn't prove anything. My point is that Superman in the 40s didn't have total monopoly on his "archetype" the way you seem to think he did. He was a character who evolved, as did Batman and Spider-Man.

Dude. It's obvious that the creators of Captain Marvel wanted to capitalize on some of Superman's success. Again, look at them side-by-side. If you can't see that, I dunno what to tell ya.

Superman was never ever as big as the Beatles, or Elvis Presley, no superhero comic ever was...nor will they ever be. Elvis and the Beatles were hugely popular among women, easily the biggest demographic in that period, and in a pre-feminist world, many of them were stay at home and so had access to free time that allowed new acts that appealed to them to really grow. Superman and superhero comics in that period by and large targeted a male audience and male consumers, which at that time meant young kids and the emerging teenager (a word that was invented in the '40s by the way).

Uh, I really think you're underestimating how popular Superman was. Again, he was pretty much everywhere in the 40s and 50s, from newspaper strips to serials to radio shows and beyond. I mean, there was even Superman Day at the 1939 World's Fair. Mark Waid said it best: "everyone would have known Superman, from your grandmother to the immigrant who just got off of Ellis Island." So, yeah, he was almost immediately welcomed as this pop-culture phenomenon that almost everybody knew. That type of rapid success for a comic book character has only ever really been replicated twice: Batman and Spider-Man (though even in those cases, not necessarily as fast).

So...bringing this back to the topic: What factors allowed Spider-Man to follow in those footsteps?

In fact, do you know what the biggest selling comics of the '50s were...it was Carl Barks' Uncle Scrooge comics. Superman or superheroes weren't even the biggest comics in that period. Superhero comics declined in popularity in the 40s and 50s in favor of crime comics, horror comics, romance comics.

After Seduction of the Innocent came out, a lot of superheroes disappeared from comics because of the increased scrutiny of the genre. What does that have to do with what we're discussing?

Had Fawcett Comics had better management and so on, more likely we would see Superman in the same way we see say the original Human Torch (totally displaced by Johnny Storm), the Shield (a shield using patriotic hero who came before Captain America socked Hitler) and so on.

I very much doubt that.

I am talking mainly about the 40s to early 60s. O'Neill and Adams are from the '70s.

But they grew up in the 50s and 60s (also the start of their run was in the late 60s) and they still knew about Batman's street level roots.

O'Neill and Adams are most notable for creating Ra's Al Ghul, a 700 year old leader of a secret society who dipped into Lazarus Pits, quickly being recognized as the first Batman villain who was a legitimate world-ender level bad guy and introducing a global scale to his stories. Not street level, my dude. Batman in the '70s was more violent and darker than the '60s certainly, but it was also a period that fluctuated in tones. If anything it was inspired by James Bond

Again, I don't want to veer too much off-topic because this is supposed to be a thread about what made Spider-Man popular (and if you wanna continue this discussion, please message me privately).

But, uh, is Ra's all of a sudden in the leagues of Thanos or Darkseid or Galactus? He's technically immortal (though, again only through continued access to the Lazarus Pits) but at the end of the day, he doesn't really have "powers" as one would call them. His abilities begin and end at being a genius tactician, criminal mastermind, and master martial artist and swordsman. He commands the League of Assassins, but again, they're mostly people who are just really, really good martial artists. That concept is not any less "street level" in a comic book context than say a mystical clan of ninjas capable of bringing people back from the dead through powerful occult magic i.e. the Hand. So, by that logic, if you're going to say Batman isn't street-level because of Ra's and the LoA, then I don't know if you can say Daredevil is either.

Which again neglects or ignores Miller's originality which practically everyone recognized. I mean yeah, violence and murder and death, and great stories with that, was there in Batman comics and also Daredevil before Miller came, but Miller brought a perspective that was radically new. That was recognized instantly from Alan Moore downwards as doing something never before seen in comics at that time. Miller made crime stories more visceral and believable. He made Batman as a fighter on the streets believable and also put details on fighting styles of Daredevil and Elektra and so on.

I'm not saying Miller didn't contribute to Batman. Year One is hands down one of the best Batman stories of all time. However, he's given way too much credit for "inventing the modern Batman" to the point where he's given credit for things that O'Neill and Adams accomplished during their time with Batman. But this is a thread about Spider-Man. If you wanna talk more about Batman, just message me privately.