Why having the universe revolve around Batman is a problem.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

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? How about Jimmy Olsen?

So, you see, its about perpetuating the atmosphere that says this: every single piece of the Batman mythos is important and iconic in its own right and deserves to be celebrated as such, whereas for other characters...meh, even where those characters have proven themselves very important to the larger DC canon.


Yes, Green Lantern was a very big title...when they were hyping it. Not long after Johns left though, they cut it from like four titles to one. And now, that title that doesn't even come out regularly like their other books. Like, the Green Lantern anniversary issue (which grouped all the Green Lanterns into one issue, even though they're all unique characters) was the first I've seen of Hal in months.



It might be the passing of time, but I honestly don't remember those runs really getting any fanfare. And your second sentence kind of proves the point. Wonder Woman didn't need Azzarello to "create" a mythology for her. She already had one. On top of that, putting her with Superman to "generate" more interest was not something I'd say was a good thing, since it meant that DC didn't care about their individual continuity enough to maintain Superman's marriage to Lois or anything. But, ya know...

Also, can you remind me of when the last time a Wonder Woman character was given any sort of prominence in a major event? Like. honestly. When was the last time we had an event with Cheetah at the center of it all? Or Ares? I mean, never mind that one of Diana's main villains is the literal god of war and should theoretically be a cosmic-level threat to the whole DCU. Nah...let's do a Joker dragon and a Jokerized version of Bruce instead...

And again, not bashing the Joker dragon. I thought that was dope as heck. Nor am I bashing Batman Who Laughs. I actually find him quite interesting. BUT, it would be nice if, once in a while, DC actually let another hero's villains be the center of something for once, aside from Darkseid that is.



And again, what did they do once Geoff left? Weren't we promised a Seven Seas event that was delayed for essentially years if it ever really came out at all? You can't just stick a big name creator on a title and say "here" and then once they leave throw away their contributions when the next writer comes on.



Actually a lot of that is because of the apparent inability to stick to a concrete direction for said characters. They keep letting pretty much every Wonder Woman writer throw away the things that the previous writers contributed. I mean, Azzarello got rid of not a lot of the stuff that had defined Diana for decades. The only writers in the past 15 years who every really seemed to get Diana were Gail Simone and Greg Rucka and, uh, yeah, I can't say they treated those guys especially well.

They completely rebooted Superman for the New 52, getting rid of a large chunk of his mythos and supporting cast in the process. But that's starting to veer into different territory. The point is: they'd likely never completely reboot Damian Wayne, but Kara, Donna Troy, Cassie Sandsmark, and Conner Kent? Yeah, we can just erase them from continuity completely, nbd.



Except that's not nearly the only way to run a successful business. There's a reason why diversification is an established business model and why there's even just the common proverb "don't put all your eggs in one basket." DC, a lot of the time, puts all their eggs in the Batman basket.



Wait, don't you mean they finally turned to Wonder Woman and Aquaman? I mean, Wonder Woman is the movie that pretty everyone fell in love with and got people on the DCEU's side. And Aquaman is currently the highest-grossing film based on any DC character, including the Nolan Batman trilogy.

Again Batman just has more popular characters. Joker is more culturally relevant character than Lex Luthor and has been for decades now. They aren’t making those anniversary issues to push characters, they are doing it to make money. They aren’t going out of there way to publish an anniversary issue that isn’t going to sell. We both know full well a Lex issue would come in last out of all the characters you named.

It has nothing to do with trying to perpetuate a message about character importance. Example, over 10 years ago DC allowed Azzarello to write a joker graphic novel. It was very popular, sold well, and still is notable today. Before that he wrote a Luthor miniseries in the exact same style that almost nobody talks about and never gained the same traction.

Joker has been the main villain in exactly two major Batman films. Lex has been a major feature of 5 Superman films. You want to know why Joker got a solo film and Luthor didn’t? Because despite appearing in less films the Joker as a character has been a juggernaut with the public.


Moving on to Green Lantern, yes John’s run was the peak and it lost steam after. But when Green Lantern proved to be popular they threw everything and the kitchen sink at it. They launched multiple titles, they made his crossovers the biggest thing in the company at the time, they made a movie and animated show and even now they are using Morrison to try to prop it up again. That’s investment and it was merited off success at the time. You can’t just say it’s an indictment of DC that they scaled down when the numbers faded. That’s business. And I can tell you, Scott Snyder was not a big time writer when he got Batman. He had American Vampire which was on and off and one Detective Comics run. But he had to follow up Morrison who was a megastar. The comic thrived. It didn’t matter who you had in the driver seat.

As far as Wonder Woman, those runs did get fanfare. When Simone was on the title it was considered a big deal that the most prominent female writer in the industry was on Wonder Woman and DC promoted that every chance they got. It just didn’t ever take off. Again that’s not DC’s fault. And quite frankly after years of failing at getting one of their flagship characters and Trinity members to really take off in the same way the other to did, yeah they decided to try something new. So they hired JMS who was a hot property and a Marvel golden boy and gave him the same free reign Morrison and Johns got on GL and Batman to do whatever it took to shake things up and make the character more relevant. And that got media attention. Then Azzarello got it and again had a lot of hype and you may not like it but it was about as popular as anything the character’s had in a long time and at least attempted to give her a more unique niche than she had and was more well defined.

Again you can’t say it’s for lack of trying. You wanted her standard mythology? DC gave that to a popular writer and didn’t land. They tried with two other high profile writers to give the character a renovated platform. Yeah she hasn’t gotten a big cross over recently for the same reason GL never got one until John’s had the character very popular. She doesn’t sell enough. If you owned a restaurant and everyone bought steak every night and it was popular enough to get regulars and be raged about, you would feature it on your website and taking it to food fairs. If you had a fish and no matter what you tried you either couldn’t get your regulars to try it, no new customers came for the fish and when you convinced people to try it they just ordered steak again next time, you wouldn’t promote it the same way you promote the steak. Even if the fish has a handful of loyal niche customers that justify not getting rid of it.

This keeps coming down to, they tried, they gave big names the title, they tried every avenue to make it more popular, it just didn’t work.

See that’s the thing, DC has a diverse portfolio. But one product is clearly the top seller and people come for that. So that’s what they use to draw people in and when they want to try to get people to diversify, they stick Batman in cross overs to help it out. It actually is a sound business strategy because you would hope if Batman ever gets less popular it’s because the audience started liking someone else more the same way it was the Superman show until Batman took off. Until then it’s just smart to give Batman who draws the most people the most visible platform and hope someone see’s Wonder Woman or Flash or Booster Gold or whoever and wants to read more.

And no as far as the movies I don’t mean Aquaman and Wonder Woman. I sincerely believe they new MOS was on very shaky ground and didn’t do amazing so if they flopped they’d be starting over and using Batman to be in the film that expanded the universe is what guaranteed it would at least be successful enough to keep going,

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Again Batman just has more popular characters. Joker is more culturally relevant character than Lex Luthor...

And see, that's the point. That attitude is the problem. The assumption that people would just not be interested in characters outside the Bat-mythos. No, we actually don't know it would come out last. It's Lex Luthor: one of the most iconic comic book villains of all time. The character has had several of his own titles and is a staple of one of DC's flagship franchises. So you're telling me that publishing an anniversary issue for that guy is "going out of their way" when we got, again, three such issues for Batman characters.

I mean, is Lex less iconic than Catwoman or Robin as well? Again, that's an assumption you have made. Now listen, I actually prefer Batman over a lot of other characters too but Batman isn't the only character that can sell.

Again, Hollywood execs assumed for a long time that only white male characters could anchor a successful film franchise. THEN, Wonder Woman made over 800 million at the box office and is probably the most beloved DC film franchise at the moment.

...Example, over 10 years ago DC allowed Azzarello to write a joker graphic novel. It was very popular, sold well, and still is notable today...he wrote a Luthor miniseries in the exact same style that almost nobody talks about and never gained the same traction.

Uh, I've heard it definitely talked about. It's been cited, at least in comic book fan circles, as a really great story for Lex. But again, that is you choosing to look at things through your own metrics of success or critical acclaim, even if those metrics don't really hold true or paint an accurate picture.

Joker has been the main villain in exactly two major Batman films...You want to know why Joker got a solo film and Luthor didn’t? Because despite appearing in less films the Joker as a character has been a juggernaut with the public.

Again, you're applying metrics that you've decided mean something, even when those metrics are proven false. It's not like Lex Luthor hasn't had portrayals that resonated with the wider public. He has. Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor is regarded as iconic. Michael Rosenbaum's portrayal of Lex was also quite beloved by people who watched Smallville, even if that was more of a cult audience. And while the DCEU Lex wasn't what some fans wanted (though personally, I didn't have an issue with him), they also felt the same way about the DCEU Joker. The difference is...Joker was given the opportunity to redeem himself. He's afforded that chance, whereas other characters aren't.

And I'm not at all saying that the Joker film shouldn't have been made. I love that movie. BUT, they need to share the love because, again, garnering the reputation that your universe has only one thing to offer is not a good business strategy.

Moving on to Green Lantern, yes John’s run was the peak and it lost steam after. But when Green Lantern proved to be popular they threw everything and the kitchen sink at it. They launched multiple titles, they made his crossovers the biggest thing in the company at the time...

Yes, I can point to them scaling things back. Because, as I alluded to in another post, Bat-family titles that were selling the same as the Green Lantern titles post-Johns were spared cancellation and not only that but continuously relaunched and propped up.

And again, are they using Morrison to prop it up again? Because you'd assume that propping up the franchise would mean that its title came out regularly. I havent seen any big news coming out of Morrison's GL. However, I've seen countless ads and other content pumping up Joker War. And, I'm actually reading Joker War and Tynion's Batman. It's great. However, it's clear that DC cares more about getting me to read Tynion's Batman than they do about getting me to read Morrison's Green Lantern, which I have btw.

And I can tell you, Scott Snyder was not a big time writer when he got Batman. He had American Vampire which was on and off and one Detective Comics run. But he had to follow up Morrison who was a megastar. The comic thrived. It didn’t matter who you had in the driver seat.

Snyder was clearly an up-and-comer. He'd proved himself on things like Black Mirror.

As far as Wonder Woman, those runs did get fanfare. When Simone was on the title it was considered a big deal that the most prominent female writer in the industry was on Wonder Woman and DC promoted that every chance they got. It just didn’t ever take off...

Again you can’t say it’s for lack of trying. You wanted her standard mythology? DC gave that to a popular writer and didn’t land...She doesn’t sell enough...it just didn’t work.

Okay, I feel like we're getting obtuse here.

1) You're kind of just saying "it just didn't work" without establishing what it means for a property to "work." So, what does it mean for a property to "work"? Does Wonder Woman have to sell over 100k copies a month to receive the same attention as Batman? Because not even Batman has been selling that much as of late. However, Wonder Woman has been in continuous publication and maintained her own series for decades. She's also a widely recognized and iconic character that everyone knows. She is also now at the center of one of the most beloved film franchises of the modern CBM era, which is probably the most anticipated of DC's film slate. It seems you would defer only to comic book sales in determining who should get attention, whereas I would probably look to the latter.

2) The argument that she needs to be some big seller to garner attention would hold more weight if there weren't numerous examples from DC's own competitor of the contrary. Despite their film success, Iron Man, Captain America and Thor aren't Marvel's highest sellers. It's also been a loooong time since the Fantastic Four ruled the sales charts. However, who are the main characters in this year's Empyre event? Uh, yeah, those guys. And again, while the FF and the individual Avengers aren't really the highest-selling titles, 2015's Secret Wars literally hinged on Mr. Fantastic and Dr. Doom's rivalry and 2019's War of the Realms was all about Thor. However, if Marvel followed DC's current business model, all universe-spanning events would center around Spider-Man.

If you owned a restaurant and everyone bought steak every night and it was popular enough to get regulars and be raged about, you would feature it on your website and taking it to food fairs. If you had a fish and no matter what you tried you either couldn’t get your regulars to try it...

Except I wouldn't sell ONLY steak and tailor all my other products to be "steak-related." Like, I wouldn't come out with steak-flavored ice cream for dessert or literally just have all the other menu options be the steak with different accompaniments. Because, in the end, that's not how consumers function. Despite popular belief, consumers don't like to consume just one thing and when people get tired of the steak, they're gonna want something else and unless I have that something else, I'm gonna lose customers.

Translating this metaphor into comics, fans love Batman but they don't want to read about just Batman. But to get that fill for other characters, they go to Marvel to read about their characters. In other words, Marvel says this to its customers: "you like Spider-Man? Great. Here's a monthly Spider-Man title and some spin-off series, but also if you want to venture into something different, here's our big event starring the Avengers and the Fantastic Four, a Silver Surfer mini-series, we just put our hot new writer Donny Cates on Thor, and one of our established beloved veterans is headlining a whole family of X-Men titles."

Meanwhile, this is what DC has been saying to its customers of late: "You like Batman? Great. Here's the monthly Batman title with our star up-and-comer, Tom King and/or James Tynion, and a slew of other Bat-family books. You want something other than Batman? Great, here's a Harley Quinn series, two Joker mini-series, a Joker/Harley Quinn mini-series, a Robin anniversary issue, a Joker anniversary issue, and a Catwoman anniversary issue. Oh, you want something starring Flash or maybe even Doomsday? Okay, here's an event with new characters Red Death and Destroyer...alternate versions of Bruce Wayne who are like Flash and Doomsday and are here to fight Batman. Oh, and of course, we have the sequel coming out, Death Metal...which is also about Batman (and some other characters too, but mostly Batman). Oh, and now there's a Dr. Manhattan Batman too. Oh, and yes, Bendis is on Superman (because he specifically requested Superman) but he'll also be writing some Batman."

And I say this as someone who is reading and actually loving Death Metal, but do you see my point?

one product is clearly the top seller and people come for that. So that’s what they use to draw people in and when they want to try to get people to diversify

Except, I don't see much of the diversification. As I pointed out above, it's largely Batman and more Batman. And I love Batman but there's such a thing as oversaturation.

I sincerely believe they new MOS was on very shaky ground and didn’t do amazing so if they flopped they’d be starting over and using Batman...

But that's not what happened. You're engaging in conjecture. What happened was that Wonder Woman and Aquaman proved to be huge successes and Aquaman earned more than any other DC character at the box office. So, I think it's time to question the common "wisdom" that Batman is the only cash cow.

[daBronzeBomma]

And see, that's the point. That attitude is the problem. The assumption that people would just not be interested in characters outside the Bat-mythos. No, we actually don't know it would come out last. It's Lex Luthor: one of the most iconic comic book villains of all time. The character has had several of his own titles and is a staple of one of DC's flagship franchises. So you're telling me that publishing an anniversary issue for that guy is "going out of their way" when we got, again, three such issues for Batman characters.

I mean, is Lex less iconic than Catwoman or Robin as well? Again, that's an assumption you have made. Now listen, I actually prefer Batman over a lot of other characters too but Batman isn't the only character that can sell.

Again, Hollywood execs assumed for a long time that only white male characters could anchor a successful film franchise. THEN, Wonder Woman made over 800 million at the box office and is probably the most beloved DC film franchise at the moment.



Uh, I've heard it definitely talked about. It's been cited, at least in comic book fan circles, as a really great story for Lex. But again, that is you choosing to look at things through your own metrics of success or critical acclaim, even if those metrics don't really hold true or paint an accurate picture.



Again, you're applying metrics that you've decided mean something, even when those metrics are proven false. It's not like Lex Luthor hasn't had portrayals that resonated with the wider public. He has. Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor is regarded as iconic. Michael Rosenbaum's portrayal of Lex was also quite beloved by people who watched Smallville, even if that was more of a cult audience. And while the DCEU Lex wasn't what some fans wanted (though personally, I didn't have an issue with him), they also felt the same way about the DCEU Joker. The difference is...Joker was given the opportunity to redeem himself. He's afforded that chance, whereas other characters aren't.

And I'm not at all saying that the Joker film shouldn't have been made. I love that movie. BUT, they need to share the love because, again, garnering the reputation that your universe has only one thing to offer is not a good business strategy.



Yes, I can point to them scaling things back. Because, as I alluded to in another post, Bat-family titles that were selling the same as the Green Lantern titles post-Johns were spared cancellation and not only that but continuously relaunched and propped up.

And again, are they using Morrison to prop it up again? Because you'd assume that propping up the franchise would mean that its title came out regularly. I havent seen any big news coming out of Morrison's GL. However, I've seen countless ads and other content pumping up Joker War. And, I'm actually reading Joker War and Tynion's Batman. It's great. However, it's clear that DC cares more about getting me to read Tynion's Batman than they do about getting me to read Morrison's Green Lantern, which I have btw.



Snyder was clearly an up-and-comer. He'd proved himself on things like Black Mirror.



Okay, I feel like we're getting obtuse here.

1) You're kind of just saying "it just didn't work" without establishing what it means for a property to "work." So, what does it mean for a property to "work"? Does Wonder Woman have to sell over 100k copies a month to receive the same attention as Batman? Because not even Batman has been selling that much as of late. However, Wonder Woman has been in continuous publication and maintained her own series for decades. She's also a widely recognized and iconic character that everyone knows. She is also now at the center of one of the most beloved film franchises of the modern CBM era, which is probably the most anticipated of DC's film slate. It seems you would defer only to comic book sales in determining who should get attention, whereas I would probably look to the latter.

2) The argument that she needs to be some big seller to garner attention would hold more weight if there weren't numerous examples from DC's own competitor of the contrary. Despite their film success, Iron Man, Captain America and Thor aren't Marvel's highest sellers. It's also been a loooong time since the Fantastic Four ruled the sales charts. However, who are the main characters in this year's Empyre event? Uh, yeah, those guys. And again, while the FF and the individual Avengers aren't really the highest-selling titles, 2015's Secret Wars literally hinged on Mr. Fantastic and Dr. Doom's rivalry and 2019's War of the Realms was all about Thor. However, if Marvel followed DC's current business model, all universe-spanning events would center around Spider-Man.



Except I wouldn't sell ONLY steak and tailor all my other products to be "steak-related." Like, I wouldn't come out with steak-flavored ice cream for dessert or literally just have all the other menu options be the steak with different accompaniments. Because, in the end, that's not how consumers function. Despite popular belief, consumers don't like to consume just one thing and when people get tired of the steak, they're gonna want something else and unless I have that something else, I'm gonna lose customers.

Translating this metaphor into comics, fans love Batman but they don't want to read about just Batman. But to get that fill for other characters, they go to Marvel to read about their characters. In other words, Marvel says this to its customers: "you like Spider-Man? Great. Here's a monthly Spider-Man title and some spin-off series, but also if you want to venture into something different, here's our big event starring the Avengers and the Fantastic Four, a Silver Surfer mini-series, we just put our hot new writer Donny Cates on Thor, and one of our established beloved veterans is headlining a whole family of X-Men titles."

Meanwhile, this is what DC has been saying to its customers of late: "You like Batman? Great. Here's the monthly Batman title with our star up-and-comer, Tom King and/or James Tynion, and a slew of other Bat-family books. You want something other than Batman? Great, here's a Harley Quinn series, two Joker mini-series, a Joker/Harley Quinn mini-series, a Robin anniversary issue, a Joker anniversary issue, and a Catwoman anniversary issue. Oh, you want something starring Flash or maybe even Doomsday? Okay, here's an event with new characters Red Death and Destroyer...alternate versions of Bruce Wayne who are like Flash and Doomsday and are here to fight Batman. Oh, and of course, we have the sequel coming out, Death Metal...which is also about Batman (and some other characters too, but mostly Batman). Oh, and now there's a Dr. Manhattan Batman too. Oh, and yes, Bendis is on Superman (because he specifically requested Superman) but he'll also be writing some Batman."

And I say this as someone who is reading and actually loving Death Metal, but do you see my point?



Except, I don't see much of the diversification. As I pointed out above, it's largely Batman and more Batman. And I love Batman but there's such a thing as oversaturation.



But that's not what happened. You're engaging in conjecture. What happened was that Wonder Woman and Aquaman proved to be huge successes and Aquaman earned more than any other DC character at the box office. So, I think it's time to question the common "wisdom" that Batman is the only cash cow.

My God, we need a Like button.

1000% co-sign.

[bat39]

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.

Well put!

10char

[Dr. Ellingham]

Truth #1 Batman's popularity isn't keeping your favorite from getting their shine. If he was gone your favorite wouldn't suddenly get the accumulated estats properties and followers of the bat world.

Yes. Complaining that Batman hogs the spotlight and prevents a more balanced paradigm is like saying Apple has too much iPhone stuff at their store.

Batman and Superman made DC, and were their primary products for 70+ years. DC is really their house. Marvel is a different thing; Spider-Man was king, but by the 70s (and before the market was fully matured), they had diversified and focused on building a tight universe. It's what Marvel was. And is.

4. A event with your favorite let say... Vixen for example... is harder to sell, takes more investment, and is more likely to fail. Doesn't make business sense.

True.

Though the world of media is changing now; there is so much media, and DC is cashing in wherever they can.

But are they going to create another Superman or Batman-level cape franchise that has enduring popularity for decades? No.

But nobody else is going to do that, either. In every industry, there are always a few titans that can't be beat, or if they can - not for very long.

Batman's been at or near the top for 80 years. I have great respect for an idea like that, which can maintain through an ever-changing world.

[Rise]

I know for a fact that many people couldn't care less about Aquaman and went to see the movie for Jason Momoa. Stop making a big deal out of its "success".

Whether people here like to admit it or not, many people care more about Batman than any other DC character. If having a successful movie suddenly make it easy to push characters in comics, Marvel wouldn't have hard time doing it with Iron Man, Captain America...etc.

[The Darknight Detective]

Do you guys draw straws to see who gets to start the monthly "Batman is overexposed" thread?

I swear there's a new thread like this what feels like every week, when does it become beating a dead horse? We get it, the majority of you think DC relies too heavily on Batman to the detriment of other characters. No offense but this is like making a thread about how awful Batman & Robin, Catwoman, Green Lantern were.

Clearly neither side is going to change their minds, those who think DC uses him too much will continue to do so until they see some sort of change that's satisfactory to them. And people who think the way DC pushes him is smart business because of his popularity aren't going to change their stances either.

The thing for DC to do is get non-readers to read titles featuring non-Bats stories and characters. Which is, of course, easier said than done, since the industry has been (despite far more potential readers now than at its beginnings) on a downward slide for 80-something years.

[Aahz]

Of course, they did. He was the star writer so obviously when he left, some of his following would also leave. The point is that, instead of really putting in an effort to increase the sales and build the franchise, they decided that it meant that the GL franchise couldn't sustain itself without Johns, even though it had a large fanbase. Meanwhile, there were several Bat-family titles like Catwoman and Red Hood that were selling at the same level that they didn't cancel or have continuously relaunched in an effort to increase their sales.

In other words, they're more willing to give Batman and Bat-family titles some slack even where they're underperforming, but other properties aren't given the same luxury because they're not viewed as "essential" to DC's business. That's a mistake.

I think they actually first went from 4 monthly books, to 2 bi monthly books, which iirc did both OK, I'm not really sure why they went back to one book.

Btw. Catwoman got actually cancelled due to low sales, and got relaunched after the wedding, when the interest in the character increased again.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

I know for a fact that many people couldn't care less about Aquaman and went to see the movie for Jason Momoa. Stop making a big deal out of its "success".

Yes, those people couldn't care less about Aquaman. I mean, they are so indifferent to him that they decided to spend 2+ hours watching his movie...

Yeah, you see how that doesn't track, right? If they saw the movie, then there was obviously something about it that appealed to them, if only to see a cool new character that they weren't that familiar with. And that seems to have worked out.

Whether people here like to admit it or not, many people care more about Batman than any other DC character. If having a successful movie suddenly make it easy to push characters in comics, Marvel wouldn't have hard time doing it with Iron Man, Captain America...etc.

And yet Marvel still seems to be able to find the time to give focus to Captain America, Thor, the Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, and Iron Man in relative equality, even if their own titles aren't setting the world on fire sales-wise.

[Holt]

I know for a fact that many people couldn't care less about Aquaman and went to see the movie for Jason Momoa.

If that were the case Conan the Barbarian would've been a huge hit.

[SiegePerilous02]

Comics wise, things have heavily skewed more towards Superman and Batman at DC. There are historic ebbs and flows but that's generally how it's always been. And likely will remain that way. But it's still cranked up to a ludicrous for the latter in recent years, and more importantly comics themselves are a very niche hobby. Batman is the most popular in that medium, but it's a medium that gets more irrelevant each passing day. The future of these characters is likely not going to be monthly serialized comics in a few decades unless things change drastically.

Batman and Superman are still beastly IPs outside of comics (the hype surrounding BvS pre-release was down to how popular and iconic they are, and MOS got a lot of hype re-release and still did well despite being divisive), but the other characters aren't at as much of a disadvantage outside of comics as they are in them. Wonder Woman proved she could be really popular among people who don't read comics, and the comics utilize her poorly. Aquaman was a success and it wasn't down to just Momoa. It was a combo of Aquaman being extremely well known (even if mainly as a joke) and being played by a popular actor. The film couldn't have gotten the success without that combo. Like others said, Mamoa alone isn't enough to draw a crowd or else people would have actually given a **** about Conan

[Midnight_v]

If that were the case Conan the Barbarian would've been a huge hit.

C'mon... now. (^_^) that was pre-Khal-Drago wasn't it? Thats not really fair ist not just looks its fame too.



Personally, I felt this way about superman way more than batman at times.

The other flying bricks live in this guys shadow SOOOOOO much and like the others to me are just as good or better but most of the time
they're NOT the one that saves the day.

Martian Manhnter
Shazam
Capt. Freaking ATOM.

The list goes on but the reality is....
If you can't shake that paradigm you can't shake the batman paradigm either.

Maybe DC can't either... maybe they don't want to because or reasons other that individuals opinions on cbr really aren't that important.

I like Capt.Atom. I like Monarch. Hell I like shazam and man-hunter, but until you personally complaining about bats can make a compelling argument about how
to make one of those guys replace superman in importance. Or that ANY female heroes can do the same to WW...

You're just spinning vitirol about a situation that isn't fixable. Mostly because the idea that the D.C. universe revolving around Batman/Superman(doomsday clock is a much worse offender imho)
IS NOT a problem.
Except to you(us) on Cbr.

Outside of this cesspool of inbred thinking there's this thing called BRAND RECOGNITION... so unless you have a genius plan ala Deadpool the movies you're not going to be able to get that sway with anyone else.
The horror of that is... when that does happen? When some OTHER character does get big? You see the "I'm really tired of Deadpool hogging all the spotlight threads" AHAHAHAHA.
Thats not realistic or fair...


The biggest thing I've keep coming back to is "Event Leviathan" and a very few other books like that which had some meta-textuals about the dc universe, and the things we're brushing past here.
Some things worth reading imho.

The fact that that book didn't get overwhelming support is one of those things that lets me know... people don't really want change they just want "Their favorite to get some shine, but thats not gonna happen even if batman never leaves gotham again.

A few of us talk at length about how Firestorm, Blue Beetle, Stargirl could make a new trinity perfectly and change the dc universe but as soon as that got notices someone tried to but 2 bat characters on the book... Not realizing that role is taken by beetle.
No one is allowed to grow, I get that, but nor are projects other than the big 3's projects supported heavily by the fans.

Its not D.C. its "us".

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

.

Snipping your quote to keep it within the word count.


You honestly think it’s merely an assumption that Luthor would sell less than Joker? You want to take a poll on this site? You want to look at comics where Luthor got focus and Joker got focus. The metrics are there. You can hide behind a non scientific measurement of it, but when it’s a no brainer to so many people it comes off as flat.

Also you can complain about a Robin 80th anniversary but it ranked 12th in comics bought that month and was 3rd in money made that month. If you want to make the argument Luthor would do better have at it.

And it’s just not true that Batman’s the only one that gets talented writers. Batman’s the only character that didn’t get a real solid run with John’s at his peak. Supes had Johns, Robinson, Morrison and now Bendis. WOnder Woman had Rucka, Simone, JMS, Azzarello. Green Lantern had Johns, Vendetti (and the company was high on Vendetti at the time and Morrison. And tbh Tynion and King aren’t that great.

Hollywood didn’t assume ****. They took the characters that were given to them that were predominately white male. The two biggest box office draws of the last 20 years are Will Smith and Dwayne Johnson. They put Mamoa as Aquaman when they could have easily cast a white guy if they wanted to. Blame the comic companies for the characters.

I don’t know why you keep pointing to Wonder Woman when that film globally made less than the last two Batman films, Batman vs Superman, Aquaman and made less than 80 million more than Suicide Squad. You talk a lot about assumption but you keep talking this film up when the numbers simply aren’t there.

Okay and this is the part where you made a bunch of vague statements for why Wonder Woman does in fact work.

March 2020: Wonder Woman ranked 66th on the Diamond chart. 7 different Bat titles ranked ahead of it.
Feb 2020: Wonder Woman ranked 64. That’s her highest book. 10 Batman titles including books featuring Joker or Quinn ranked ahead of it
Jan 2020: Here’s some red meat, WW ranked number 1 for issue 750. Two months later Flash ranked 2 for the same issue number. So yeah an anniversary of her can sell
Dec 2019: WW ranks 50. 8 Batman comics rank ahead of it.
Nov 2019: WW ranked 52. 8 Batman titles (I’m counting Catwoman) ahead of it.

Okay let’s go 5 years
Starting better.

Jan 2015: WW ranked 33. 8 Batman comics ranked higher
Feb 2015: WW ranked 37. 8 Batman titles ranked higher.
skip to the end of the year Dec: WW ranked 62. 10 Batman titles ranked higher.

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 the top 500 at 425

2012: WW 5 ranked 267, 6 fell to 310, by 13 the series was 490 and actually one of the least profitable comics on the top Batman 5 through 15 ranked in the top 40 with barely any movement. All the Detective issues were between 59 and 131 aside from the annual. All the Green Lantern issues were between 62 and 114. Flash was the only other major hero to experience a similar drop only Flash started over 100 spots higher.

That’s not long into the new 52.

Okay those are your numbers compared to other DC major characters.

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.

Right before the new 52 her best issue in 2010 was issue 600. That ranked 135. 601 went back to 403. By 603 she was at 472.

That’s the data. Whatever they do it doesn’t work out, she debuts lower for new ventures than established characters and quickly descends right after. Only anniversary issues really help her. That’s the facts. No assumption. You can rationalize it however you want..

The rest of your discussion is silly. DC doesn’t sell only steak. They clearly have more than Batman, they just use him more and clearly his numbers more than justify it. Marvel doesn’t have a single character that if you give it any promotion is going to outright dominate the way Bats does. Oh and btw, Marvel is very similar with Spuder-Man dominating and having crossovers and multiple titles, the biggest difference is Batman has a higher peak

So for all your mental gymnastics there’s way more than Batman at DC and the numbers just dictate that financially the healthiest thing to do is to make Batman the most prominent character.

[Gaius]

When I need to remember why I like Bruce... I read Earth One.

Yes, Earth One remains one of the more refreshing takes on Batman in recent years and the only time I've cared about his origin.

[Frontier]

Yes, Earth One remains one of the more refreshing takes on Batman in recent years and the only time I've cared about his origin.

I'm a big believer in Telltale Batman myself .