Why having the universe revolve around Batman is a problem.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

You honestly think it’s merely an assumption that Luthor would sell less than Joker?...

More than Joker? Maybe not. But more than Robin and Catwoman? Maybe. Or, at the very least, enough to justify publishing it and making a profit? Uh, definitely. And unless you're actually arguing that Lex just wouldn't move any units whatsoever, then that's the point. DC leaves money on the table by choosing not to push these characters that they have in their roster.

Also you can complain about a Robin 80th anniversary...

Oh my god, how many times do I have to say that I'm not bashing anything?? I'm just saying it would be nice if DC actually you know, paid attention to their other characters.

And it’s just not true that Batman’s the only one that gets talented writers...

Lol. That's your argument? That Batman didn't have Johns (even though Johns wrote the Earth One OGNs)? Meanwhile, literally all the writers you've mentioned have worked on Batman and on top of that, Batman had Moench, Dixon, Snyder, King, etc. And again, not at all saying that Batman doesn't deserve top talent, but DC does tend to shovel top talent right to Batman even when it's a bad fit. King was actually a good example of that. Great writer, but his Batman was very hit or miss. But, the thinking process was "King is starting to become a big name. Let's stick him on Batman."

Tynion's Batman, though, is fire.

Hollywood didn’t assume ****...

Dude, Hollywood's past aversion towards women and people of color, specifically women of color, is well-documented:

link
link
link
link

And it's not just a lack of female protagonists. In 1995, women only had 33% of speaking roles in film. And, honestly, the fact that they had decades to make a Wonder Woman film, yet didn't until 2017, while they'd made like 10 Batman films and 5 Superman films by that point is more than proof of the point.

I don’t know why you keep pointing to Wonder Woman...

Uh, because it was still a huge financial success and has been the most critically acclaimed film of the DCEU. Not a Superman or Batman film, but a Wonder Woman film is the most critically beloved film of DC's recent offerings. You may not like that fact, but it's a fact. And I literally just mentioned Aquaman in my post, another non-Batman character. So...how does your bringing him up disprove my point?

You're really missing the point. No, it's not about getting Wonder Woman or any other character to "replace" or "dethrone" Batman. It's about the fact that other characters can have great success if you let them instead of literally having everything be about Batman.

vague statements for why Wonder Woman does in fact work.

Yeah, except everything of what I said is true. Wonder Woman is an iconic character who has maintained her own series for decades. Are you going to argue that she isn't?

March 2020: Wonder Woman ranked 66th on the Diamond chart....

Again, you're really missing the point. Again, Marvel literally gives entire events to characters that sell at the same level as Wonder Woman. Captain America? Sells at the same level WW does. Thor? Same level. Even Venom sells at the same level as Wonder Woman. However, while Wonder Woman is rarely given a chance to shine in the larger DC lineup, Marvel will have Thor and Captain America headline their own events.

And again, the fact that there were over 8 Batman titles is proof of my point.

Ok now let’s just go year by year

2019: the best Wonder Woman comic ranked 365. The top book was a Batman comic (Detective 1000, but let’s ignore anniversary issues) Batman has 9 books just in the top 50. Green Lantern had 4 titles ahead of WW’s best with the highest being over 100 spots over her. Flash had 3 with two being over 150 spots over. Over 10 Superman comics ranked higher (albeit the highest was Batman and Superman 1)

2018: the best Wonder Woman book was 236. Way better. 2 Batman books were the top 10 comics of the year. 26 books featuring the name Batman were in the top 100. 38 titles finished ahead of Wonder Woman’s best. The best Catwoman issue ranked higher. GL had two titles in the top 100. Flash generally out performed Wonder Woman that year.

2017: best WW title was 287. This whole thread is complaining about Batman getting cosmic stories. Dark Knights Metal had 4 titles in the top 10. 41 of the top 100 books that year were Batman related. That’s nearly half the top 100 issues sold that year. Flash had 3 titles in the top 100 and 19 ahead of WW’s best issue. It well out paced her and her book had lower issue numbers. Green Lantern didn’t have a hot year but it’s best issue was 229. Superman’s book generally sold higher than WW’s peak

I can’t find year end data on 2016.

2015: WW got clobbered at 439. To be fair most did because Star Wars came out. Batman got pushed to 33 for the finale of Endgame. Supes got relegated to the 300’s.

2014 was a lot better for as she got to 142 in her Superman team yo for Future’s End and her main title got one issue at 218 though everything after that got in the 400’s unless she was connected to Superman. Over 20 Bat comics made the top 100 and I realized I didn’t even search for Detective Comics

2013. Again Superman/Wonder Woman had a few issues sell well but her solo had one issue in

In fact the only time in the last decade where WW had solo books in the top 100 were at the start of the new 52. She was out by issue 3 and in the 200’s by issue 4. Flash, Green Lantern, Batman, Action, Detective and Batgirl started higher. And aside from Flash and Batgirl, WW had clearly the steepest drop from issue to issue.

Comichron literally puts Wonder Woman as consistently in the top 100 monthly sales just last year, right next to Catwoman, Guardians of the Galaxy, Detective Comics, and above Flash, Daredevil, and Captain America. So, yeah, your argument doesn't really hold because a) sales constantly fluctuate and b) a lot of very iconic characters have middling sales. Heck, Superman sells around the same amount as Diana. And that's the point. If Marvel ONLY went by the monthly sales, the only characters who'd get any attention would be Spider-Man and the X-Men and we would never even see the FF or Thor or Captain America or they would only be presented to us through the lens of Spider-Man, but that's not the reality.

That’s the data. Whatever they do it doesn’t work out...

So, we should, what, obviously box Diana away for good and bring out another Batman title to take her place? Or just pretend that she doesn’t have a larger role in the DCU than just being that woman who shows up in the background during one of Batman’s big stories?

See, because that’s the point. She sells at the same level as Captain America and Thor do and yet, Thor and Captain America are given a lot more weight and prominence in their universe than Diana is given in hers. It's not about replacing or outshining. It's about simply sharing the spotlight. And, despite your insistence to pick on Wonder Woman, this is not a problem unique to Wonder Woman. DC publishes other titles, but it doesn't throw nearly as much capital behind those other titles or characters as they do behind the Bat-characters and not only that but other characters in the DCU are too often presented through the lens of “how does this person relate to Batman?”

Again, if Marvel editorial operated on that philosophy, most of their iconic characters wouldn't be around either. That's the difference. Marvel has developed properties that may not have an immediate return on investment but lays the groundwork for a more successful universe. Meanwhile, DC sticks with one property over all the others and the universe is weaker for it.

Marvel is very similar with Spider-Man dominating and having crossovers and multiple titles, the biggest difference is Batman has a higher peak.

Okay, so tell me, how many of other characters' titles has Batman appeared in just this past month? Now, compare that to Spider-Man. I'm betting that Batman has been in more of other characters' titles than Spidey has. Batman and the Bat-family also have more ongoings than Spider-Man does.

Now, take into account the fact that Amazing Spider-Man actually outsells Batman and Spider-Man is, in general, a higher grossing franchise than Batman is. And yet, Marvel still doesn't feel the need to pimp out Spider-Man as much as DC does Batman. If your logic held true, wouldn't Marvel be shoving Peter into literally every title?? The answer lies in this simple fact: the leadership at Marvel has more faith in their other characters than the leadership of DC has had in their other characters.

And I know I keep bringing up Marvel, but that's because it's a virtually parallel situation that proves how your logic falls apart. If only investing in your most popular character was the pathway to success, then why is it that Marvel doesn't do that and yet still consistently outsells DC?

Also, what's with the hostility? You like Batman, we get it, but are you so invested in the status quo of Batman-over-everyone that the very notion that other characters/properties deserve a chance to shine is offensive to you?

[Gaius]

I'm a big believer in Telltale Batman myself .

Haven't played it myself but heard some interesting things so I might try to check it out someday.

[warzon]

I've been had enough of The Bat.the books I collect at DC right now is Justice League.i'm not a fan of this new Legion.Batman and the Outsiders I was collecting that but it was for Black Lightning and the Signal.i also stop collecting Wonder Woman as well until they get her and her family together I can't continue to waste my hard earned money on books w mediocre writing and art.Comics sure aren't what they use to be.there's actually Nothing out right now that I feel like I can't to read.Thank God for back issues.

[Midnight_v]

I've been had enough of The Bat.

My observation is that position is only held by comics fans who've been over-saturated but normies feel differently and in the end that who they're reaching for.

Not we print fiends but the Dads, Gf's, Cousins, sisters, moms who are going to go see the new big phenom movie and the kids who are going to get the toys....

or the jocks who are buying the shirts.

People aren't really tired of Batman/Superman/WW shirts, but not a line for a Deadman, etrigan, vixen shirt. Maybe the underutilized characters need work on their merchandising appeal.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

My observation is that position is only held by comics fans who've been over-saturated but normies feel differently and in the end that who they're reaching for.

Not we print fiends but the Dads, Gf's, Cousins, sisters, moms who are going to go see the new big phenom movie and the kids who are going to get the toys....

or the jocks who are buying the shirts.

People aren't really tired of Batman/Superman/WW shirts, but not a line for a Deadman, etrigan, vixen shirt. Maybe the underutilized characters need work on their merchandising appeal.

Here's the problem with that, though: I'm not even really seeing much merchandising or push for the other two of the Trinity. Another thing to consider is peoples' perceptions of DC as a whole.

I have a lot of close acquaintances who don't read comics and only consume superhero media through movies, TV shows, and video games. Up until the Wonder Woman movie came out (and maybe even afterward), this was the most common thing I would hear from people: "Marvel is better because they have a bunch of cool characters like Spider-Man, the X-Men, Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Guardians of the Galaxy, and all the rest; DC only has Batman and nobody else. All their other characters are lame."

Now, as comic book readers, we know that this isn't true. However, that is the perception that the current strategy has put out into the world and there are times when it seems that the leadership at DC themselves feel that it's true, since they promote Batman over all the other characters in their roster.

[Agent Z]

Honestly I blame other characters for not branching out as much and being successful recently.

And whose fault is that?

Hell, even when other characters do become successful DC does little to nothing to capitalize on it.

[SpideyCeo]

More than Joker? Maybe not. But more than Robin and Catwoman? Maybe. Or, at the very least, enough to justify publishing it and making a profit? Uh, definitely. And unless you're actually arguing that Lex just wouldn't move any units whatsoever, then that's the point. DC leaves money on the table by choosing not to push these characters that they have in their roster.



Oh my god, how many times do I have to say that I'm not bashing anything?? I'm just saying it would be nice if DC actually you know, paid attention to their other characters.



Lol. That's your argument? That Batman didn't have Johns (even though Johns wrote the Earth One OGNs)? Meanwhile, literally all the writers you've mentioned have worked on Batman and on top of that, Batman had Moench, Dixon, Snyder, King, etc. And again, not at all saying that Batman doesn't deserve top talent, but DC does tend to shovel top talent right to Batman even when it's a bad fit. King was actually a good example of that. Great writer, but his Batman was very hit or miss. But, the thinking process was "King is starting to become a big name. Let's stick him on Batman."

Tynion's Batman, though, is fire.



Dude, Hollywood's past aversion towards women and people of color, specifically women of color, is well-documented:

link
link
link
link

And it's not just a lack of female protagonists. In 1995, women only had 33% of speaking roles in film. And, honestly, the fact that they had decades to make a Wonder Woman film, yet didn't until 2017, while they'd made like 10 Batman films and 5 Superman films by that point is more than proof of the point.



Uh, because it was still a huge financial success and has been the most critically acclaimed film of the DCEU. Not a Superman or Batman film, but a Wonder Woman film is the most critically beloved film of DC's recent offerings. You may not like that fact, but it's a fact. And I literally just mentioned Aquaman in my post, another non-Batman character. So...how does your bringing him up disprove my point?

You're really missing the point. No, it's not about getting Wonder Woman or any other character to "replace" or "dethrone" Batman. It's about the fact that other characters can have great success if you let them instead of literally having everything be about Batman.



Yeah, except everything of what I said is true. Wonder Woman is an iconic character who has maintained her own series for decades. Are you going to argue that she isn't?



Again, you're really missing the point. Again, Marvel literally gives entire events to characters that sell at the same level as Wonder Woman. Captain America? Sells at the same level WW does. Thor? Same level. Even Venom sells at the same level as Wonder Woman. However, while Wonder Woman is rarely given a chance to shine in the larger DC lineup, Marvel will have Thor and Captain America headline their own events.

And again, the fact that there were over 8 Batman titles is proof of my point.



Comichron literally puts Wonder Woman as consistently in the top 100 monthly sales just last year, right next to Catwoman, Guardians of the Galaxy, Detective Comics, and above Flash, Daredevil, and Captain America. So, yeah, your argument doesn't really hold because a) sales constantly fluctuate and b) a lot of very iconic characters have middling sales. Heck, Superman sells around the same amount as Diana. And that's the point. If Marvel ONLY went by the monthly sales, the only characters who'd get any attention would be Spider-Man and the X-Men and we would never even see the FF or Thor or Captain America or they would only be presented to us through the lens of Spider-Man, but that's not the reality.



So, we should, what, obviously box Diana away for good and bring out another Batman title to take her place? Or just pretend that she doesn’t have a larger role in the DCU than just being that woman who shows up in the background during one of Batman’s big stories?

See, because that’s the point. She sells at the same level as Captain America and Thor do and yet, Thor and Captain America are given a lot more weight and prominence in their universe than Diana is given in hers. It's not about replacing or outshining. It's about simply sharing the spotlight. And, despite your insistence to pick on Wonder Woman, this is not a problem unique to Wonder Woman. DC publishes other titles, but it doesn't throw nearly as much capital behind those other titles or characters as they do behind the Bat-characters and not only that but other characters in the DCU are too often presented through the lens of “how does this person relate to Batman?”

Again, if Marvel editorial operated on that philosophy, most of their iconic characters wouldn't be around either. That's the difference. Marvel has developed properties that may not have an immediate return on investment but lays the groundwork for a more successful universe. Meanwhile, DC sticks with one property over all the others and the universe is weaker for it.



Okay, so tell me, how many of other characters' titles has Batman appeared in just this past month? Now, compare that to Spider-Man. I'm betting that Batman has been in more of other characters' titles than Spidey has. Batman and the Bat-family also have more ongoings than Spider-Man does.

Now, take into account the fact that Amazing Spider-Man actually outsells Batman and Spider-Man is, in general, a higher grossing franchise than Batman is. And yet, Marvel still doesn't feel the need to pimp out Spider-Man as much as DC does Batman. If your logic held true, wouldn't Marvel be shoving Peter into literally every title?? The answer lies in this simple fact: the leadership at Marvel has more faith in their other characters than the leadership of DC has had in their other characters.

And I know I keep bringing up Marvel, but that's because it's a virtually parallel situation that proves how your logic falls apart. If only investing in your most popular character was the pathway to success, then why is it that Marvel doesn't do that and yet still consistently outsells DC?

Also, what's with the hostility? You like Batman, we get it, but are you so invested in the status quo of Batman-over-everyone that the very notion that other characters/properties deserve a chance to shine is offensive to you?

this is not true. Even as a spidey fan. Spidey sells less merchbfor adults than deadpool, and kids usually end up buying avengers Merch than solo spidey.

[skyvolt2000]

this is not true. Even as a spidey fan. Spidey sells less merchbfor adults than deadpool, and kids usually end up buying avengers Merch than solo spidey.

At one point it was true. Because Peter was shoved down our throats just as much as Batman. However with Deadpool and others-it has decreased a LOT.
How many variations of Peter Parker did we see as toys in the 90s to about 2010?

People aren't really tired of Batman/Superman/WW shirts, but not a line for a Deadman, etrigan, vixen shirt. Maybe the underutilized characters need work on their merchandising appeal.

If all you do is FLOOD the market with one person and you do that IN SPITE of others who have had success-don't be shocked when the others struggle.

How does an underutilized character work on their appeal?
If you keep employing the same set of writers? Editors? Who don't care for them? Or write them as CRAP?
Or the same marketing and manufacturing department that WON'T do anything that is not Batman related?

DC leaves money on the table by choosing not to push these characters that they have in their roster.

Do you know how many folks have told me they wish (BLANK) has some stuff for me to buy. And NO telling them to go to the comic book store and by (Blank's) trade is not a solution.

Black Lighting's daughters don't have one. Static's trades are OUT OF PRINT. John Stewart doesn't have one. Vixen does not have one.
And even if they did and they sold-guess who will make an excuse to STILL not do anything. DC as they toss out another Batman book.

And before anyone says no one wants those guys. Visit sites like Rageon with all the custom made stuff. That is the money DC (and others) are leaving on the table.

And whose fault is that? Hell, even when other characters do become successful DC does little to nothing to capitalize on it.

I have a lot of close acquaintances who don't read comics and only consume superhero media through movies, TV shows, and video games. Up until the Wonder Woman movie came out (and maybe even afterward), this was the most common thing I would hear from people: "Marvel is better because they have a bunch of cool characters like Spider-Man, the X-Men, Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Guardians of the Galaxy, and all the rest; DC only has Batman and nobody else. All their other characters are lame."

This. It's not good business for your company to be held hostage by ONE franchise. When you have a bunch of them.
On Amazon top 100 for teen graphic super hero novels

16 Peter Parker books
2 Miles books
7 X-Men
4 Avengers
1 Bruce Banner
1 Cho Hulk
2 GOTG
2 Ultimate books & Infinity War
1 The Eternals

1 Batman
1 Supergirl
2 Superman
1 Hal Jordan
1 Harley
2 JSA
1 Aqualad
1 Raven
1 Cassandra Cain
1 Shazam

Yet when you look at adult sales-BATMAN has 18 of the 22 DC books.
While Black Panther, Ms Marvel, X-23, Jane Foster & Cap America join the list.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

this is not true. Even as a spidey fan. Spidey sells less merchbfor adults than deadpool, and kids usually end up buying avengers Merch than solo spidey.

It is true. Spider-Man still outranks Batman in terms of gross profits.

And while this graph is from 6 years ago, it's more than likely still informative:



Here's the source

[The True Detective]

It is true. Spider-Man still outranks Batman in terms of gross profits.

And while this graph is from 6 years ago, it's more than likely still informative:



Here's the source

That Wikipedia info is incomplete tho, for some reason they don't add Batman's comic book and video game sales into his total. If Spider-Man has sold $1.074B worth of comics according to Wikipedia and Batman has sold more comics than Spider-Man (484m vs 385m) Batman should have another 1B+ in sales added to his total. That's not even counting how much the Lego Batman, Arkham and his other games have brought in.

That graph has been used a lot over the past 6 years but it's very outdated. In the most recent info of merchandise sales, which is for 2018 it's Spider-Man $1.075B vs Batman $839M, and that's a year Spider-Man appeared in the $2B grossing Infinity War, PS4 game and Into the Spiderverse. While Batman had no major movie or game.

[Steel Inquisitor]

That Wikipedia info is incomplete tho, for some reason they don't add Batman's comic book and video game sales into his total. If Spider-Man has sold $1.074B worth of comics according to Wikipedia and Batman has sold more comics than Spider-Man (484m vs 385m) Batman should have another 1B+ in sales added to his total. That's not even counting how much the Lego Batman, Arkham and his other games have brought in.

That graph has been used a lot over the past 6 years but it's very outdated. In the most recent info of merchandise sales, which is for 2018 it's Spider-Man $1.075B vs Batman $839M, and that's a year Spider-Man appeared in the $2B grossing Infinity War, PS4 game and Into the Spiderverse. While Batman had no major movie or game.

Vidoe game sales should be included, that's a billion dollar business. Comics sales? No. The entire industry is a drop in the bucket to a mildly successful MCU movie, it was only king in the 90's and that was because people thought it was a stock market rather than something to read and that's been over for a long, long time. They're not selling billions of anything in comics, they're lucky to sell millions.

[Midnight_v]

Here's the problem with that, though: I'm not even really seeing much merchandising or push for the other two of the Trinity. Another thing to consider is peoples' perceptions of DC as a whole.

I have a lot of close acquaintances who don't read comics and only consume superhero media through movies, TV shows, and video games. Up until the Wonder Woman movie came out (and maybe even afterward), this was the most common thing I would hear from people: "Marvel is better because they have a bunch of cool characters like Spider-Man, the X-Men, Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Guardians of the Galaxy, and all the rest; DC only has Batman and nobody else. All their other characters are lame."

Now, as comic book readers, we know that this isn't true. However, that is the perception that the current strategy has put out into the world and there are times when it seems that the leadership at DC themselves feel that it's true, since they promote Batman over all the other characters in their roster.

*shrug* I didn't know we were counting anecdotal evidence like how many of your friends prefer marvel. ymmv.
If we are though I'd bet that superman shirts are the most commonly sold.
The thing is... I mentioned this earlier is that
"Batman getting pushed is a problem" <------- is basically a lie.

What people are mostly hiding behind a thin veneer is "My favorite isn't getting that push" "OOOOOOOoooohh I it weren't for that INFERNAL BAAAATMAN!" and no...

the most common thing I would hear from people: "Marvel is better because they have a bunch of cool characters like Spider-Man, the X-Men, Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Guardians of the Galaxy, and all the rest; DC only has Batman and nobody else. All their other characters are lame."

So... dc doesn't have the power of "Cool" because, why? Because they movies were bad and lambasted, probbably that. . . most of the people saying that have only been exposed to the movies is the implication and dc lost at that...

Losing at the movies ISN'T the fault of batman getting all the attention.

and thats what they know these guys from but... I"m pretty sure the flash has some popularity as well. Idk.

Ironman is the center of the MCU. . . many people have acknowledged that.

Dc didn't catch the same updraft as marvel so Supes being the center of the "Dc-dark-verse" didn't really strike on. But the bat-dude abides.

There are other characters that could catch on and ride the popularity into being something "Cool" and "more" but it just isn't going to be the ones people on cbr clamor for.

Doomsday Clock was an entire series dedicated to explaing how Supes is the center of everything. Metal is the same for bats. They are the pillars.

What many people fail to understand is or refuse to accept that there have to be pillars of a franchise/universe etc. at all. Its really does.

I feel as if there's some selfishness, and dishonesty going on here. Idk.

So tomorrow if they tried to make Idk: "Filler-woman" the dc frontrunner for the biggest push ever.

Do you think that by removing batman/superman from the equation as the center of the universe that "Filler-woman" can move enough product to keep the lights on?
I don't believe so. I think it'll do exactly what the inhumans did.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

"Batman getting pushed is a problem" <------- is basically a lie.

Or, and here's an idea, maybe people just mean what they say when they say it? Here's the thing: Batman is actually one of my personal favorite characters. I love everything about the Batman mythos. So, I have no problem with Batman getting a push. However, I am not only a fan of Batman and would like to see other characters grab the limelight once in a while. Because it honestly seems that, quite frequently, DC editorial regards the larger DC Universe as the "Batman and Friends" show.

Inspired by this thread, I decided to take a look at DC's current publishing slate. This is a list of recent, ongoing, and upcoming titles that star Batman or Bat-family characters:

- Batman
- Detective Comics
- Batman Beyond
- Batman/Superman
- Batgirl
- Batman and the Outsiders
- Dark Nights: Death Metal
- Batman: The Smile Killer
- Joker: Killer Smile
- Batman vs. Ra’s al Ghul
- Catwoman
- Harley Quinn
- Harley Quinn and the Birds of Prey
- Harley Quinn: Black + Red + White
- Nightwing
- Red Hood and the Outlaws
- The Batman’s Grave
- Three Jokers
- Joker/Harley: Criminal Sanity – Secret Files

Now, that's not even counting things like Young Justice or Teen Titans, which are teams led up by Robins Tim Drake and Damian Wayne respectively, or things like Justice League where Batman is a founding member of the team. Now, you might think: so what? 16 Batman titles is not a big deal. He's the most popular character. However, that accounts for over 27% of DC's entire publishing output. In contrast, Superman (that other DC icon) has only around 7 titles, which means he accounts for about 12%. Wonder Woman (that other other DC icon) has all of two titles, which means she accounts for 3%. Green Lantern, a property which less than 10 years ago, was one of DC's highest-selling titles, with sales consistently in the top 10, literally only has one mini-series coming out at the moment.

So, I think we can draw the conclusion that Bat-characters are disproportionately represented among DC's current publishing slate. And keep in mind, DC can only publish so many titles. So, yeah, every time they give a title to a Batman character, it is somewhat taking away from another character's shot to get that title. Again, I love Batman and I love the Joker, but does the Joker need three mini-series and an anniversary issue in the span of one year?

And since I'm not nearly done beating this dead horse, let's compare it to Marvel's publication of Spider-Man titles. This is the list of recent, current, and upcoming Spider-Man related titles:

- The Amazing Spider-Man
- The Amazing Mary Jane
- Black Cat
- Gwen Stacy
- Miles Morales: Spider-Man
- Non-Stop Spider-Man
- Amazing Spider-Man: Daily Bugle
- Spider-Man: Noir
- Spider-Man
- Symbiote Spider-Man: Alien Reality
- Venom

And no, I'm not counting Spider-Woman because, despite the name, Jessica has different powers, is not really a Spider-Man family character, and is more likely to be hanging out with the Avengers and Carol Danvers than she is to be seen with Peter. And there might be some flaws in my methodology, but altogether, Spider-Man accounts for 14% of Marvel's output. And, yeah, that's partly because Marvel just publishes more titles than DC, but that's kind of the point. Because Marvel has consistently built up their other IPs outside of Spider-Man, they are able to publish other titles about other characters with the confidence that they will have an audience.

And, as a second point, on top of the issue of just getting disproportionately more titles, Batman also consistently pops up in other characters' titles. For example, he just showed up in Suicide Squad (another title with a good few Bat-characters) and looks to be playing a big part in Tom King's Strange Adventures. And that sort of leads us into the other issue: how Batman is like an amoeba, drawing other characters into his world. Deathstroke is a Titans villain? Nah, he's cool so he's a Batman villain now. Etrigan? Deadman? Lady Shiva? Merlyn? Zatanna? Black Canary? All of them have been brought in some form or another into the Bat-franchise. In some cases, those make sense, but...there is a bit of a problem when almost every character is presented as if the most important thing about them is "how do they relate to Batman?"

In other words, DC has done more than just treat Batman as their most popular character. They've treated Batman as the avatar through which the entire DC Universe is filtered and that means that all other characters unfortunately take a back seat. However, Marvel doesn't do that. Their most popular character, Spider-Man (a character that sells similarly if not more than Batman), gets a lot of focus but is still just a part of their universe, not the guy through which everything is filtered. The Marvel universe is larger than just Spider-Man and his family and as such, it's all the healthier for it.

And again, I wanna drive this point home. I AM A HUGE BATMAN FAN. I'm actually reading and loving both Joker War and Death Metal. However, I can also take a critical look at the strategy of making Batman the center of everything and recognize the flaws in that.

So... dc doesn't have the power of "Cool" because, why? Because they movies were bad and lambasted, probbably that. . . most of the people saying that have only been exposed to the movies is the implication and dc lost at that...

Losing at the movies ISN'T the fault of batman getting all the attention.

I mean, you don't think part of that might have something to do with the fact that, between 1990 and 2015, of the 14 DC-based films made, half of them were Batman-related and Batman and Batman characters have still gotten way more films than any other character? I mean, Flash, a founding member of the JLA, has never gotten a film. Neither has Martian Manhunter, another foundng father of the JLA. And the JLA characters outside of Batman and Superman that have gotten films have only gotten them in recent years. Again, it's a crying shame that Wonder Woman, who has been a well-known iconic character since the 1940s, only got a film dedicated to her in 2017, while Batman and Superman had about 10 each before then.

And just like the comics, there's only so many movies that they can fund in a given year. So, yeah..

Ironman is the center of the MCU. . . many people have acknowledged that.

Dc didn't catch the same updraft as marvel so Supes being the center of the "Dc-dark-verse" didn't really strike on. But the bat-dude abides.

That "updraft" was Marvel Studios seeing the potential of properties and investing in them.

There are other characters that could catch on and ride the popularity into being something "Cool" and "more" but it just isn't going to be the ones people on cbr clamor for.

I mean, it's not like people are clamoring for very obscure characters. It's not like we're saying the Question or Creeper should be at the center of everything. I'm not even saying that anyone should be the center of everything. But Wonder Woman? Aquaman? Flash? These are characters that have always been important in the DC canon and have had at least some success in other media when given the chance.

Doomsday Clock was an entire series dedicated to explaing how Supes is the center of everything. Metal is the same for bats. They are the pillars.

What many people fail to understand is or refuse to accept that there have to be pillars of a franchise/universe etc. at all. Its really does.

Again, that is exactly the issue. As I literally just explained, treating the whole universe as if it revolves around one character, no matter who that character is, makes the universe feel small and less diverse. Batman and Superman don't have to be the pillars. They are and should be relatively well-known superheroes and looked up to and respected in-universe but, again, having the universe literally revolve around them is not anymore necessary than it is for the Marvel Universe to revolve around Spider-Man. And Marvel doesn't revolve around Spider-Man and it's consistently done better than DC.

In other words, the universe should be just that: a universe filled with diverse and interesting characters where the spotlight shifts freely between all those different characters, and not just fixed on one or two, but really just on one.

I feel as if there's some selfishness, and dishonesty going on here. Idk.

Oh yes, it is so selfish to want to see some other characters have a little bit of spotlight shone on them. How dare we??

So tomorrow if they tried to make Idk: "Filler-woman" the dc frontrunner for the biggest push ever.

Do you think that by removing batman/superman from the equation as the center of the universe that "Filler-woman" can move enough product to keep the lights on?
I don't believe so. I think it'll do exactly what the inhumans did.

It would at least be something different. It would at least be DC showing their readers "hey we don't just care about Batman and Superman. We care about all of our characters." Marvel at least took that chance with the Inhumans and still pushes Thor, Captain America, Iron Man, and the Fantastic Four even when those characters sell nowhere near the levels of Spider-Man or the X-Men. And I'll bet you that Empyre, their big summer event that stars neither Spider-Man nor any of the X-Men so far, will probably sell gangbusters because they have invested in the larger Marvel Universe as a brand, not just one or two select characters (but really just one).

[hareluyafan1]

Or, and here's an idea, maybe people just mean what they say when they say it? Here's the thing: Batman is actually one of my personal favorite characters. I love everything about the Batman mythos. So, I have no problem with Batman getting a push. However, I am not only a fan of Batman and would like to see other characters grab the limelight once in a while. Because it honestly seems that, quite frequently, DC editorial regards the larger DC Universe as the "Batman and Friends" show.

Inspired by this thread, I decided to take a look at DC's current publishing slate. This is a list of recent, ongoing, and upcoming titles that star Batman or Bat-family characters:

- Batman
- Detective Comics
- Batman Beyond
- Batman/Superman
- Dark Nights: Death Metal
- Batman: The Smile Killer
- Joker: Killer Smile
- Batman vs. Ra’s al Ghul
- Catwoman
- Harley Quinn
- Harley Quinn and the Birds of Prey
- Harley Quinn: Black + Red + White
- Nightwing
- Red Hood and the Outlaws
- The Batman’s Grave
- Three Jokers
- Joker/Harley: Criminal Sanity – Secret Files

Now, that's not even counting things like Young Justice or Teen Titans, which are teams led up by Robins Tim Drake and Damian Wayne respectively, or things like Justice League where Batman is a founding member of the team. Now, you might think: so what? 16 Batman titles is not a big deal. He's the most popular character. However, that accounts for over 27% of DC's entire publishing output. In contrast, Superman (that other DC icon) has only around 7 titles, which means he accounts for about 12%. Wonder Woman (that other other DC icon) has all of two titles, which means she accounts for 3%. Green Lantern, a property which less than 10 years ago, was one of DC's highest-selling titles, with sales consistently in the top 10, literally only has one mini-series coming out at the moment.

So, I think we can draw the conclusion that Bat-characters are disproportionately represented among DC's current publishing slate. And keep in mind, DC can only publish so many titles. So, yeah, every time they give a title to a Batman character, it is somewhat taking away from another character's shot to get that title. Again, I love Batman and I love the Joker, but does the Joker need three mini-series and an anniversary issue in the span of one year?

And since I'm not nearly done beating this dead horse, let's compare it to Marvel's publication of Spider-Man titles. This is the list of recent, current, and upcoming Spider-Man related titles:

- The Amazing Spider-Man
- The Amazing Mary Jane
- Black Cat
- Gwen Stacy
- Miles Morales: Spider-Man
- Non-Stop Spider-Man
- Amazing Spider-Man: Daily Bugle
- Spider-Man: Noir
- Spider-Man
- Symbiote Spider-Man: Alien Reality
- Venom

And no, I'm not counting Spider-Woman because, despite the name, Jessica has different powers, is not really a Spider-Man family character, and is more likely to be hanging out with the Avengers and Carol Danvers than she is to be seen with Peter. And there might be some flaws in my methodology, but altogether, Spider-Man accounts for 14% of Marvel's output. And, yeah, that's partly because Marvel just publishes more titles than DC, but that's kind of the point. Because Marvel has consistently built up their other IPs outside of Spider-Man, they are able to publish other titles about other characters with the confidence that they will have an audience.

And, as a second point, on top of the issue of just getting disproportionately more titles, Batman also consistently pops up in other characters' titles. For example, he just showed up in Suicide Squad (another title with a good few Bat-characters) and looks to be playing a big part in Tom King's Strange Adventures. And that sort of leads us into the other issue: how Batman is sort of an amoeba, drawing other characters into his world. Deathstroke as mainly a Titans villain? Nah, he's cool so he's a Batman villain now. Etrigan? Deadman? Lady Shiva? Merlyn? Zatanna? All of them have been brought in some form or another into the Bat-franchise. In some cases, those make sense, but...there is a bit of a problem when almost every character is presented as if the most important thing about them is "how do they relate to Batman?"

In other words, DC has done more than just treat Batman as their most popular character. They've treated Batman as the avatar through which the entire DC Universe is filtered and that means that all other characters unfortunately take a back seat. However, Marvel doesn't do that. Their most popular character, Spider-Man (a character that sells similarly if not more than Batman), gets a lot of focus but is still just a part of their universe, not the guy through which everything is filtered. The Marvel universe is larger than just Spider-Man and his family and as such, it's all the healthier for it.

And again, I wanna drive this point home. I AM A HUGE BATMAN FAN. I'm actually reading and loving both Joker War and Death Metal. However, I can also take a critical look at the strategy of making Batman the center of everything and recognize the flaws in that.



I mean, you don't think part of that might have something to do with the fact that, between 1990 and 2015, of the 14 DC-based films made, half of them were Batman-related and Batman and Batman characters have still gotten way more films than any other character? I mean, Flash, a founding member of the JLA, has never gotten a film. Neither has Martian Manhunter, another foundng father of the JLA. And the JLA characters outside of Batman and Superman that have gotten films have only gotten them in recent years. Again, it's a crying shame that Wonder Woman, who has been a well-known iconic character since the 1940s, only got a film dedicated to her in 2017, while Batman and Superman had about 10 each before then.

And just like the comics, there's only so many movies that they can fund in a given year. So, yeah..


That "updraft" was Marvel Studios seeing the potential of properties and investing in them.



I mean, it's not like people are clamoring for very obscure characters. It's not like we're saying the Question or Creeper should be at the center of everything. I'm not even saying that anyone should be the center of everything. But Wonder Woman? Aquaman? Flash? These are characters that have always been important in the DC canon and have had at least some success in other media when given the chance.



Again, that is exactly the issue. As I literally just explained, treating the whole universe as if it revolves around one character, no matter who that character is, makes the universe feel small and less diverse. Batman and Superman don't have to be the pillars. They are and should be relatively well-known superheroes and looked up to and respected in-universe but, again, having the universe literally revolve around them is not anymore necessary than it is for the Marvel Universe to revolve around Spider-Man. And Marvel doesn't revolve around Spider-Man and it's consistently done better than DC.

In other words, the universe should be just that: a universe filled with diverse and interesting characters where the spotlight shifts freely between all those different characters, and not just fixed on one or two, but really just on one.



Oh yes, it is so selfish to want to see some other characters have a little bit of spotlight shone on them. How dare we??



It would at least be something different. It would at least be DC showing their readers "hey we don't just care about Batman and Superman. We care about all of our characters." Marvel at least took that chance with the Inhumans and still pushes Thor, Captain America, Iron Man, and the Fantastic Four even when those characters sell nowhere near the levels of Spider-Man or the X-Men. And I'll bet you that Empyre, their big summer event that stars neither Spider-Man nor any of the X-Men so far, will probably sell gangbusters because they have invested in the larger Marvel Universe as a brand, not just one or two select characters (but really just one).

"Applauds."

I feel as if there's some selfishness, and dishonesty going on here. Idk.

Yeah right. It's so selfish of me to wish that say, when DC release a new line of action figures, one of them will be a Dolphin figure instead of the entire line being Batman characters (who already have tons of action figures). What a terrible person I am.

[SiegePerilous02]

The truth is really somewhere in the middle. Batman and to a lesser extent Superman are going to be juggernauts no matter what considering their brands have been around since the late 1930s and despite some ups and downs, are still going strong. It's a little late in the game to bemoan one or both of them always being near or at the top. But disproportionately skewing things towards Batman is ridiculous. Had Wonder Woman flopped, God knows when (if ever) we'd see another movie for her. DCEU Superman wasn't any more embraced than DCEU Batman, yet Batman is getting another film series with Reeves/Pattinson on top of already having the Nolan trilogy while we're up in the air on cinematic Superman's future. It makes sense to continue with Batman movies since he's a reliable brand, but putting all your eggs in one basket and not investing more into brands that are roughly on par with him (Superman, WW, Flash) isn't the wisest business decision.

None of the other tentpole IPs are going to ever be on the level of Superman and Batman by this point, but that doesn't mean they can't be much more successful than they are. Wonder Woman will probably always be on a weird tier of important between the other two members of the Trinity and everyone else, but it still doesn't make sense that they didn't capitalize on the films's critical success and legs at the box office (better than BvS, despite making less) more than they did. If She-Ra can get a successful cartoon, there is no Earthly reason Wonder Woman can't.

Some of the other examples of putting top talent on other characters and it still not being successful as Batman don't really hold up. Yeah Superman got Johns a few times. What does it matter when Johns isn't really a good Superman writer and/or he phones it in when he's on the title? Similarly, Johns has never written Wonder Woman's ongoing, but the few times he's written her in other books has been either abysmal or just solid. His grand contribution to her mythos was giving her a long lost twin brother nobody wanted and didn't even bother to write it himself. Things are not so simple that you can just give top talent to a character and expect it to work because not every writer fits every character. Some talented up-and-comers would probably be better suited for the big name characters than some of the big name writers out there.