Why having the universe revolve around Batman is a problem.

[SpideyCeo]

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).

Funny, spidey sells on equal terms yet he still cant get his own adult spin off r rated spinoffs like batman characters or more famously punisher.

Hes still an all ages family friendly character and that helps him over most superheroes because anyone(kids the most) can get into his stuff and be approved by legal guadianship that might restrict their kids to seeing like the deadpool movies despite being a xmen character.

Spidey is just more kid friendly.

[The True Detective]

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.

According to this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...dia_franchises Spider-Man has sold over $1B of comics over the years, Batman has sold almost 100 million more comics than Spider-Man has. That's another well over $1B that could've been added to Batman's total revenue. Comics may not be as big as movies but if you sell 484 million of them that's a nice chunk of change.

[Agent Z]

Funny, spidey sells on equal terms yet he still cant get his own adult spin off r rated spinoffs like batman characters or more famously punisher.

What does that have to do with anything? Most of these r rated spin-offs aren't even that successful to begin with. Punisher has had three movies which were all either critical or financial failures and his one t.v. show was cancelled after two seasons.

[Killerbee911]

What does that have to do with anything? Most of these r rated spin-offs aren't even that successful to begin with. Punisher has had three movies which were all either critical or financial failures and his one t.v. show was cancelled after two seasons.

None of the Marvel Netflix shows were actually cancel because of numbers(maybe Iron Fist is arguable). Punisher and Daredevil were clearly successful shows and would have gone on without silent Disney/Netflix war.

As for the topic the market determines how much a character gets used, The biggest mistake that people make in these type of topics is assuming that people would be buying other books if Batman books weren't around.

[Agent Z]

None of the Marvel Netflix shows were actually cancel because of numbers(maybe Iron Fist is arguable).

I never said it was. My point is that Spider-Man has a number of t.v. shows, at least some of which are considered good while the Punisher has only one that never lasted past two seasons.

As for the topic the market determines how much a character gets used, The biggest mistake that people make in these type of topics is assuming that people would be buying other books if Batman books weren't around.

Except no one is saying that.

[Aahz]

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.

It is nor like Batman movies are the only ones they are doing, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Suicide Squad are getting sequels, and they have other movies in production.

The problem with Superman is I guess that his movies haven't been succesfull in a long time.

And the Falsh movie is for some reason in "development hell".

And they have several TV shows with all kinds of characters.

[Killerbee911]

I never said it was. My point is that Spider-Man has a number of t.v. shows, at least some of which are considered good while the Punisher has only one that never lasted past two seasons.

You post implied that R rated project didn't do well and you went on to cite Punishers 2 seasons which is I responded like did. You made it sound like Punisher got cancel because it was bad not because Netflix made a decision not to depend on Marvel properties.

[Cyberstrike]

Again, did they out some big writers on Superman? Yes. But a) they keep shoveling more big-name talent onto Batman and Batman titles and b) they still don't give as much attention to other characters' titles and lore as they do to Batman. Again, we got not just one but three 80th anniversary issues celebrating Batman characters (Robin, Joker, Catwoman). Meanwhile, Lex also debuted in 1940 so this is his 80th year too. Where's his anniversary issue? Last year was Supergirl's 60th anniversary. Where was her celebratory issue?

Did we get one for Lois Lane two years ago?

To be fair DC did release a hardcover collecting various Lois Lane stories from across DC for her 75th Anniversary. It was just reprints and not new material and that was 5 or 6 years ago.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

According to this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...dia_franchises Spider-Man has sold over $1B of comics over the years, Batman has sold almost 100 million more comics than Spider-Man has. That's another well over $1B that could've been added to Batman's total revenue. Comics may not be as big as movies but if you sell 484 million of them that's a nice chunk of change.

Okay, but even if comic sales make Batman the higher grossing franchise when included, the point still stands that Spider-Man is a franchise that is about as profitable and popular as Batman, yet Marvel still doesn't feel the need to literally have their entire larger universe revolve around Spider-Man in the same way that DC does with Batman. Even though Spider-Man gets plenty of attention, the attention he gets doesn't literally overshadow the rest of the Marvel Universe.

[SiegePerilous02]

It is nor like Batman movies are the only ones they are doing, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Suicide Squad are getting sequels, and they have other movies in production.

The problem with Superman is I guess that his movies haven't been succesfull in a long time.

And the Falsh movie is for some reason in "development hell".

And they have several TV shows with all kinds of characters.

Batman gets the most despite MoS doing very well despite its divisive reputation. I also believe Superman Returns was more successful at the BO than Batman Begins at the time, and Batman himself was considered box office poison after Batman & Robin. BvS did damage to both brands, but Superman is the one that is shelved and we get more Bat-spin offs. Between the characters, the Reeves films and Burton films are of comparable success, and they have a bunch of crap shared between them with the exceptions of the Nolan Bat-films.

And they've both been given far more opportunities than Wonder Woman. yeah she got a movie now, but she's been around since 1941. Jenkins even said the studio expected the movie to fail, and if it did we wouldn't see her at the movies again for a while, if ever. Wonder Woman and Aquaman getting their own films series is great, but more can still be done. Compared to the MCU doing more with less, it's pretty embarassing.

[The Darknight Detective]

Batman gets the most despite MoS doing very well despite its divisive reputation. I also believe Superman Returns was more successful at the BO than Batman Begins at the time, and Batman himself was considered box office poison after Batman & Robin.

The former didn't make a profit, however, while the latter did, IIRC.

[Aahz]

According to Box office Mojo Batman Begins made about 10 million less than Superman Returns, on a Budget that was smaller by 120 Million.

And of course the sequels made a lot more money,while I don't think that many people would have been really want a sequel to Superman Returns or Superman Returns.

The Reeves Films are from the 70s and 80s and the last ones were also not that well received.

And after the DCEU movies, I really think they would have to deliver a really awesome movie to get people into theatres.

[SiegePerilous02]

The former didn't make a profit, however, while the latter did, IIRC.

I stand corrected on that one

According to Box office Mojo Batman Begins made about 10 million less than Superman Returns, on a Budget that was smaller by 120 Million.

And of course the sequels made a lot more money,while I don't think that many people would have been really want a sequel to Superman Returns or Superman Returns.

The Reeves Films are from the 70s and 80s and the last ones were also not that well received.

And after the DCEU movies, I really think they would have to deliver a really awesome movie to get people into theatres.

After DCEU, they will definitely have to earn the audiences trust back. But even after the Reeves films and Superman Returns, there was hype for MOS and it still did really well despite being divisive, indicating people have wanted more Superman movies. BvS had an insane amount of hype, a lot of it to do with Batman but mostly because it was about seeing these two together on screen for the first time. WW helped as well. So it wasn't just Batman causing interest in that pre-release.

Even with the Reeves films, it should be noted that the first couple were hits but WB wasn't involved in their production, I believe they only distributed them. So WB has never actually been responsible for a well received Superman movie. That's more on them than the character or interest in him. The common factor here is that WB has Batman as their Golden Goose, but kind of suck with everyone else and stuff like Wonder Woman was just a happy accident because Jenkins knew what she was doing.

[skyvolt2000]

It is nor like Batman movies are the only ones they are doing, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Suicide Squad are getting sequels, and they have other movies in production.

The problem with Superman is I guess that his movies haven't been successful in a long time.

And they have several TV shows with all kinds of characters.

The ISSUE has been not following up on those things.
Superman and Batman can fail and still get shot after shot after shot. With every excuse being accepted-from studio interference to China to a virus.
Everyone else??? Those excuses are NOT accepted. Even if the film did well.

As for the topic the market determines how much a character gets used, The biggest mistake that people make in these type of topics is assuming that people would be buying other books if Batman books weren't around.

And what market are you talking about? Because what market told Dan to RUIN not only Wally West but Teen Titans, Cassandra Cain and so many others?

Are we talking direct market-who claims anything with POC and women and LGBTQIA or oddball type books can't sell?
Meanwhile books that nobody asked for or claim can't sell-are DOING that.
Zombie Tramp is at 77 issues and averages 6 variants a month.
Lumberjanes a book with female leads and LGBTQIA is over 70 issues old and Boom has ZERO issues selling LGBTQIA lead books.
Elvira, Barbarella, Red Sonja, Betty Page and Vampirella have books. Most of us were not alive the last time Barbarella was in comics.
A book about a CELL PHONE STORE and it's slacker black guy employee made 10 issues.
A book starring a BLACK girl (Princeless) account for 10 trades.
Allegiance Arts-COMICSGATE SUPPORTERS have books at Wal-Mart SELLING.

How are these books finding audiences? No tv shows or movies. What are they doing that Dc is not and in some cases with the SAME talent?

Folks are buying books not worshiping Batman. Don't let comichron fool you.
I have gone to comic cons and see KIDS destroy boxes looking for FANTASTIC FOUR, Wally West, Static, Kyle and so many others that folks claim no one wants to read about.

The point of this topic is not everything has to worship Batman. If I am DC I would have a HUGE issue when I look at Amazon trade sales and Batman is the only DC guy there. Or Batman is the only Dc guy with CURRENT stuff and everyone else is 15+ years ago.

If Miles Morales can have 2 top 100 books why can't a Cyborg or Aqualad or Tim Drake?


Some humor from Gary Frank and Jamal Igle

https://twitter.com/JAMALIGLE/status...09239725006848

I had a Batman joke but I need a 12 issue story arc, 6 spinoffs and 80 variant covers to tell it.

Gary FrankTumbler glassTropical fish
@1moreGaryFrank
· 23h
I had a comics joke but I can't get approval for it until I can link it to Batman.

[Agent Z]

You post implied that R rated project didn't do well and you went on to cite Punishers 2 seasons which is I responded like did. You made it sound like Punisher got cancel because it was bad not because Netflix made a decision not to depend on Marvel properties.

I said most of them aren't successful not that none of them are. I never attributed Punisher being cancelled after two seasons to its quality or lack thereof. My point was that Spider-Man was a more successful franchise than the Punisher without needing an r-rated adaptation.