Why having the universe revolve around Batman is a problem.

[manwhohaseverything]

They stuck a Batman fan on a Superman movie and made it Batman with super-powers. That's not Superman's fault, and it's not really Batman's fault either.

Who told you that? He is more of watchmen fan. I am fairly certain if he isn't a fan most people wouldn't be superman fans.Anyways, this argument is boring and repetitive from both sides.if people don't like batman they should just stop buying his stuff.let's face it dc as cohesive universe or world is far inferior to marvel. Dc is built around characters. Marvel is built as a universe with characters, largely. It feels like a huge universe and it is a bigger universe . It's not anything new. it would take a systematical rethinking of the dc world by the management and creative from the bottom up to change that. And i don't think that's gonna happen anytime soon .

[bat39]

Batman is popular I get it, but their comes a point when a franchise becomes so big that it starts to distort itself. Rather then match a story concept up with a character that it makes sense with, now we are stretching and contorting Batman in order to fit the story. We have a inter dimensional Joker/Batman mashup character. Batman is a street level character who fights mobsters and costumed freaks, time travel and inter dimensional menaces are more Superman’s thing. Or at least they would be, if DC would stop just shoveling everything pitched into the Bat office. This is the result when the heroes in your universe don’t have distinct roles. Everything just get pored into the most popular character and all the other franchise just kind of whither on the vine.

You know, the whole "Batman is a street-level characters who mostly sticks to the shadows" thing is actually a relatively recent development. Things started to head in that direction with Denny O'Neil's revamp of the character in the 70's, and later with Year One and everything that followed. And even since then, while that's been the popular perception of the character, its certainly not been, shall we say, exclusively the truth.

Batman has always been a versatile character with a wide range of stories straddling multiple genres. The superhero genre itself, of which Batman is one of the earliest examples, straddles multiple genres - crime, drama, action, romance, sci-fi, fantasy, horror and much more.

I mean, let's consider the first year of Batman stories by Bob Kane and Bill Finger. You have:

-Batman fighting vampires
-Batman dealing with weird psychedelic flowers
-Batman fighting genetically modified 'monster men'
-Batman foiling a world domination plot by a supervillain with a death-ray

And probably a few more examples I'm missing.

The Batman stories of the Golden Age and Silver Age are chock full with travel to alien worlds and dimensions, time-travel, Batman doppelgangers and a bunch of other crazy and weird stuff.

Batman was a founding member of the Justice League which would ensure that he continued to be featured in large-scale sci-fi and mystical adventures alongside other superheroes, even as his own book steadily started to move in a more grounded direction. And Post-Crisis, the 'darker and grittier' Batman, the 'street-level' Batman in the shadows, simply continued to play the same role in the wider DCU that his 'lighter' predecessor used to play!

This also goes back to the fact that most early DC heroes were generally pretty versatile. The had their distinct costumes, abilities, origin stories and supporting casts. But that apart, you could pretty much stick them in any kind of story and have it work. You could take, say, a Silver Age Green Lantern story which had GL fightining, I dunno, a super-powered gorilla from another dimension. And you could pretty much rewrite the same story to have Batman and Robin in it with a few minor changes! Instead of using a power ring to stop the gorilla, Batman would use some fancy gadget...or just wrestle him to the ground! All the scenes with Hal Jordan at Ferris Air would be replaced with Bruce Wayne hanging out at Wayne Manor. The heroes didn't even have particularly distinct personalities back then.

And today, while all of these heroes have their own 'genres' and 'niches' and distinct 'tonalities', on some level, the versatiliy is still there. So theoretically, you could still have Batman take on a superpowered gorilla from an another dimension...though the story would look a lot different from a Green Lantern story.

[Noodle]

The Batman stories of the Golden Age and Silver Age are chock full with travel to alien worlds and dimensions, time-travel, Batman doppelgangers and a bunch of other crazy and weird stuff.

That's not a good barometer, though. Those comics started dying off in popularity, and the Batman line was almost cancelled due to sales until they brought him back to his detective and street-level roots in 1964. The combination of that and the 1966 show saved that franchise.

[qwertyuiop1998]

Agreed.And not just Batman himself. DC having stuck every Batman related character in everywhere, But unfortunately not all DC's writers could handle those characters.Harley Quinn,TBWL,Joker etcetcetc.DC pushing Batman franchise so hard that they start ruining it.

[Frontier]

All of this. Others have pointed this out before but I think it bears repeating. Marvel has never had a "trinity" that their universe revolves around and everyone else has to make deference to. And I think that has helped them in a way that has hindered DC. Spiderman is the public face of Marvel but he's more of a mascot. The universe itself doesn't revolve around him. When they lost the movie license to Spiderman and the X-Men, they just bolstered the Avengers and boosted their sales. Using the success of the movies to sell them. Now, Marvel's method has it's own share of problems. If a legacy character takes over a role, that can harm the franchise but nothing at Marvel ever lasts forever.

Fictional characters are only as popular as the people who own them put into their promotion. Batman is successful because DC has chosen to promote him over everyone else. They stuck a Batman fan on a Superman movie and made it Batman with super-powers. That's not Superman's fault, and it's not really Batman's fault either. It's just a mindset that what works for Batman applies to everyone else as well. Which is incorrect. The most successful DCEU movie so far has been WW which didn't follow this model. They let an actual WW fan write her movie and let her do her own thing. If Vixen got her own show and DC went out of their way to promote Vixen, I imagine you might see a boost in Vixen action figures or Halloween costumes or whatnot. I noticed a big jump in Flash merch when the show came out. Batman is only what TPTB make him.

That doesn't mean Marvel isn't equally guilty of trying to make a character or property central even at the expense of the story or fans (Avengers vs. X-Men, Civil War I and II, etc.).

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

That's not a good barometer, though. Those comics started dying off in popularity, and the Batman line was almost cancelled due to sales until they brought him back to his detective and street-level roots in 1964. The combination of that and the 1966 show saved that franchise.

Ehhh it’s a pretty good barometer. Batman was street level about as long as Golden Age Superman was “street level”. Then they both had craziness in the silver age. Denny O’Neil took him back to more of a paranormal adventurer who would fight science fiction monsters like Manbat, or mystical threats like Ra’s which required him traveling around the world, he’d occasionally pal around with Deadman etc. So even then it wasn’t tight street level and that was Bronze Age anyways when everyone getting scaled back.

Yes there was a period post crisis from like 85-96 where Batman stuck around the street level stuff. Some classic stories came out of it but some of it was just trite. Then in 97 you had Batgod appear in Morrison’s JLA and had the Uber competent Batman who could resize to any threat forever.

So the idea that Batman can be boxed into this street level only motif isn’t really true of the majority of the characters history. Yes it’s his general status quo but not some hard rule and he’s really just Spider-Man level with less powers who can function in any type of story.

Honestly I blame other characters for not branching out as much and being successful recently. Namely Superman and Wobder Woman. Green Lantern pulls their weight and has done some good stuff. Even Flash has defined the speedster niche and still has street level and more big time craziness stuff.

[skyvolt2000]

That doesn't mean Marvel isn't equally guilty of trying to make a character or property central even at the expense of the story or fans (Avengers vs. X-Men, Civil War I and II, etc.).

Marvel has never had a "trinity" that their universe revolves around and everyone else has to make deference to.

Marvel is just as guilty as DC.

While Miles and the rest of the spider kids have not buried Peter Parker.

X-Men have done their share of damage. See Black Panther and I would say see the Inhumans but they don't exist anymore.

Civil War has held folks hostage.

How many books have shoe horned Logan or Deadpool in them?

How many books have seen the same 5 folks guest star in them?

How many volumes of Carol Danvers have we seen? While Monica can't sniff one? While Black Panther is a stealth Storm book.

Marvel has done it but not to the level of Batman.

[Pinsir]

The funny thing is I think DC has become less Batman focused in the past few years now, then they were 10-20 years ago.

[skyvolt2000]

Honestly I blame other characters for not branching out as much and being successful recently. Namely Superman and Wobder Woman. Green Lantern pulls their weight and has done some good stuff. Even Flash has defined the speedster niche and still has street level and more big time craziness stuff.

I can't branch out if I have bad leadership from my editors.

What does the Bat Office NOT allow that goes on in other places?

Remember who was one of the executive editors... until 2017.
He was also over the Superman line.

What about the editor for Static, Cyborg & Katanna's books?

Also who made certain character "pitch toxic"? Who kept certain characters out of books?

Who tossed fired into the war of Green Lanterns? Who thought adding 3 more to the war of Hal vs John vs Kyle vs Guy. To now toss in Jessica, Simon and Jo?

Superman franchise being a mess falls under WHO?

The failed push of Cyborg.

Why can't Wonder Woman keep writers?

These are leadership issues. Batman thrives because of the talent his franchise gets. That is succeeding in SPITE of management.

[Frontier]

While Miles and the rest of the spider kids have not buried Peter Parker.

I wouldn't say they get off lightly though when you see how they fair in media focused around Peter. The better stuff for Miles usually ends up because of Sony more than Marvel.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Here is the deal, if you all owned businesses that had a large product portfolio and one element of that portfolio was extremely popular, sold well, and was proven to increase sales in whatever product you integrated it into, most companies would just do it unless it was completely incompatible. Batman works and sells in so many books that it is stupid for them not too do it. People get into other books because Batman showed up in a cross over.


It’s just business. And quite frankly Bats has worked in JL books and big time crossovers for years at this point. And you know what, it’s not like Supes or someone else is exactly proving they can pioneer and build books and universe in that sector. So they might as well go with the heavy hand

But: How much of that is because they haven't really given other properties the chance or the investment versus just...fate? I mean, I've talked about this before but Batman is given pretty much everything. The best up-and-coming writers, artists, multiple events and spin-off books, etc. So, what emerges is a whole chicken/egg question. Is Batman getting all of this because he's popular or is he popular because he's getting all of this? Or is it both: a circle that feeds into itself?

Either way, it does mean that other titles and characters are suffocated for the slightest investment.

But your reasoning does have a familiar ring to it. For decades, executives traditionally shunned the notion of superhero blockbusters with a female or POC lead, citing that only white male leads could be financially successful. And then, Wonder Woman and Black Panther came along and shattered that notion. So, two things from that: 1) why isn't Diana receiving a more consistent push when its proven that she has a wider appeal? And 2) is the traditional "wisdom" that only Batman is capable of selling well among DC properties another example of an outdated assumption?

[Pinsir]

I actually developed a theory as to why Batman always seems to attract a lot of talent;

>>>> Most talented newcomers get put on C tier books initially (Morrison on Animal Man and Doom Patrol, King on Omega Men and Vision)
>>>> Their success allows them to gain any book they wish, which is usually an A tier like Batman, JL (or Superman if Batman is not available)
>>>> So many popular characters that aren't as popular as Batman tend to get overlooked and it often won't be for decades (if ever) until major creators eventually work on Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, etc. So if you want Tom King on Wonder Woman, you'll get it in two decades
>>>> There is also a sort of a snowball effect, where Batman has so many highly rated runs, that creators see it as a property that can tell 'deep' and 'artistic' stories.
>>>> There is also a financial thing too, Batman sells more just because, so you gain more money and fame working on the title

[Badou]

I used to think quite similarly and still think that Batman is at his best when he is street-level and has his feet more on the ground than up in space. However, it's not that different than how Marvel treats Spider-Man. Yes, Peter is a street-level hero at heart, being the "Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man", but he also has a fair share of high-flying cosmic adventures:

- He's joined the Fantastic Four

- He was a part of Secret Wars

- He fights alien symbiotes on the reg and Knull, the symbiote god, is one of the most powerful beings in Marvel's cosmic landscape

- He has teamed up with his time-traveling "successor" from 2099

- He just recently stopped a city-wide invasion from Dr. Doom

- Oh and the Spider-Verse, where Spider-Man has infinite versions of himself across the multiverse, is its own franchise at this point.

So, yeah, I've decided to start looking at Batman as the Spider-Man of DC. Now, does that mean I think Batman should be the center of everything in the DC Universe? No. Not necessarily. But there might be room in the DC canon for Batman to be both street-level and have a fair share of cosmic adventures.

The big difference I guess is that Spider-man doesn't run the Avengers. Batman basically controls the Justice League and even funds their operations. When Spider-man does things for the Avengers or other bigger entities he still operates mostly as a member of a team rather than the person running the entire show.

[Dr. Ellingham]

But: How much of that is because they haven't really given other properties the chance or the investment versus just...fate?

Pretty much zero. If you look at the sales charts from 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 40 years ago, the main brands today were the main brands then. The superhero market is a mature one - meaning, the established brands are what they have been, with little variation. Same thing with say, computers - the big brands are Apple, ASUS, HP, Dell. Or soda - Coke, Pepsi, etc. New players come along, some last, but few join the ranks of the big fish in the long term.

Which is one reason DC isn't interested in creating other Supermen and Batman-level superheroes - they already have two of the biggest fish in the pond, and what's more valuable - trying to make (say) Hawkman as big as Flash or Aquaman (which the odds are against), or creating another Batman TV show or video game?

What they're looking to do now is diversify their remaining portfolio, and take advantage of their hundreds of other IPs across different media. They don't need to turn Doom Patrol into the Justice League, or Booster Gold into something as big as Flash. Just getting a pilot made every few years, or a film treatment, and best-case an actual multimedia adaptation - it's all money driven by the library, since DC owns all these IPs already. That appears to be the strategy.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Pretty much zero. If you look at the sales charts from 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 40 years ago, the main brands today were the main brands then. The superhero market is a mature one - meaning, the established brands are what they have been, with little variation. Same thing with say, computers - the big brands are Apple, ASUS, HP, Dell. Or soda - Coke, Pepsi, etc. New players come along, some last, but few join the ranks of the big fish in the long term.

Not really. They actually change around more often than you think. In the 60s, Superman actually outsold Batman by a wide margin, meanwhile, the Fantastic Four ruled the roost at Marvel, and the X-Men barely sold at all. In the 80s and 90s, it would have been unthinkable to not have an X-Men, Legion, or Teen Titans title, whereas just about 5 years ago, it looked like the X-Men might not even be part of the Marvel Universe moving forward and the Teen Titans and Legion franchises have lost much of their clout. In the mid to late aughts, Green Lantern consistently ranked as one of the best-selling titles every month. Now, Superman, Green Lantern, and the Fantastic Four are all mid-tier sellers.

HOWEVER, all of those characters/titles are considered crucial and A-list properties in DC/Marvel by both their respective companies and the fans. But, they don't get near the amount of investment that the likes of Batman or Spider-Man do. Part of that is following the zeitgeist, but another part of it is that investment breeds fan devotion and popularity.

Like I suggested before, the success of movies like Wonder Woman show that less "popular" characters still have widespread appeal. Now, imagine if instead of the first Metal event, DC had planned it out that the major event book that summer centered around Wondy to coincide with the movie. I'm not suggesting that it would have swayed non-comic readers into jumping on but I can't imagine those comic book readers who saw the movie wouldn't have been motivated to pick up that event.