What are you thoughts on the value of Batman (Bruce) comics 10+ years from now?

[SiegePerilous02]

Mr.Freeze being a sympethetic villain works in other mediums like in Arkham games. Batman has like 8 decades of publishing and his rogues gallery is considered to be at least top 2 in comics so any flaw you can find in Batman's rogues gallery is found pretty much in every other hero's rogues gallery. Batman used to fight against vampires and other mythical creatures but you dont see them being reused because they dont have good story as villains against Batman like other Batman's rouges.

Every rogues gallery has plenty of duds within it, nobody is saying otherwise. Batman is no exception, it's just that his rogues gallery rarely gets called out for that despite the fact that the total number of great classic villains he has is a small percentage of the total he has. Most of his rogues gallery is comprised of the likes of KGBeast, Orca, Captain Stingaree, Crazy Quilt, Steeljacket, Gearhead, Nicholas Scratch, etc. A bunch of losers nobody cares for

There is such a thing as "too much of a good thing." Sympathetic Mr. Freeze can only be used so much before it gets old and undermines how good his first stories are.

Spider-Man's villains motives are greed or hatred of Spider-Man. Black Cat is inspired by Catwoman, people say Goblin is mixture of Lex & Joker.

Batman's villains motives are greed and hatred of Batman. Even if they don't start out that way, that's often what they devolve to before long.

The Green Goblin was an evil businessman who doubled as a costumed supervillain before Lex was revamped into that. And Lex has been a poorer character since that revamp, IMO.

Because in modern days, writers are more interested in creating new villains than developing old ones. Its just that Batman's top villains are interesting or have become popular that writers have to use them instead of creating new villains. These villains draw sales.

The thing is, Batman's villains are not anymore inherently interesting than anyone else's classic villains. If you go back to the Silver Age, most of them are in fairly forgettable stories that coast along on gimmicks and flashy designs but don't have much depth as characters. They got that way through constant usage and gained more depth through basically happy accidents (which is how these things always go) with writers noticing potential and patterns they could build off of. That is luxury few other rogues galleries have, because the talent on the books is often not as good to begin with. Plus less chances taken on other media exposure. The people who created STAS were the same ones who created BTAS, and they were very upfront about the fact that they preferred Batman and his world. They said Superman's rogues gallery was weak and so they brought in the Fourth World stuff. This perpetuates the idea that Superman has weaker villains, when in reality had we gotten a different creative team behind a Superman cartoon who had more favorable views of his world, it might be a different story

I'd argue Wonder Woman's top villains in the Golden Age had more depth to them than Batman's villains initially did in that period, and probably before the likes of BTAS got ahold of them. But they are mostly women, and the comics industry can't handle women very well, so most of them barely get any attention and even the top ones like Cheetah or Circe get misused in ways Batman's villains never do. Plus, Wonder Woman hasn't had the luxury of near constant movies and cartoons and video games to get her villains exposed and fleshed out, so of course they don't have the opportunity to draw sales.

[prepmaster]

Isn't Batman supposed to enter public domain in 2034? Then DC would receive less revenue based on their Batman related products.

The timeline of Batman's popular characters entering public domain:
In 2035, Joker, Catwoman, Clayface & Hugo Strange.
In 2036, Penguin & Scarecrow.
In 2037, Two-Face.
In 2043, Riddler & Mad Hatter.

Like in 22 years, everyone would be able to make comics with most of the characters on this pic.

[prepmaster]

I'd argue Wonder Woman's top villains in the Golden Age had more depth to them than Batman's villains initially did in that period, and probably before the likes of BTAS got ahold of them. But they are mostly women, and the comics industry can't handle women very well, so most of them barely get any attention and even the top ones like Cheetah or Circe get misused in ways Batman's villains never do. Plus, Wonder Woman hasn't had the luxury of near constant movies and cartoons and video games to get her villains exposed and fleshed out, so of course they don't have the opportunity to draw sales.

But not to the amount of sales that 3 Jokers can make, not gonna be a star of a billion dollar movie. Batman being a serious, brooding hero works in favour of his villains. WW as a character gets reinvented by new writers so developing interesting dynamics between her and her villains is gonna be even harder.

[SiegePerilous02]

But not to the amount of sales that 3 Jokers can make, not gonna be a star of a billion dollar movie. Batman being a serious, brooding hero works in favour of his villains. WW as a character gets reinvented by new writers so developing interesting dynamics between her and her villains is gonna be even harder.

But that goes back to what I said, they are mainly in that position of being able to move units at this point because more work was done with them at an earlier time and other heroes and their rogues galleries are playing catch up to varying degrees because they don't get the same amount of media exposure. Let's not forget that Batman himself has been on the verge of cancellation a few times, but he got lucky with certain runs and other media gaining traction to the point where he's their biggest asset now. Wonder Woman meanwhile proved in 2017 that she could be successful with a movie, but the fact that they waited that long isn't a good sign. How is she going to be as successful as Batman if they don't give her or her villains the same abundance of chances? Plus, Batman and his villains have been reinvented numerous times as well.

I don't see how Batman being serious and brooding helps his villains nor (more importantly) him as a character. If anything, it makes their dynamics dull. What is interesting about seeing his villains interact with an emotionless piece of wood that just silently stares at them and then hits them? And they are just predictably "crazy" and causing random destruction at this point.

This maybe sounds like I hate Batman and his rogues when that's very far from the truth, but I think the actual execution of stories with them these days isn't great. I'd much rather read a Bronze Age Batman vs. Joker story than gimmicky schlock like 3 Jokers.

[prepmaster]

But that goes back to what I said, they are mainly in that position of being able to move units at this point because more work was done with them at an earlier time and other heroes and their rogues galleries are playing catch up to varying degrees because they don't get the same amount of media exposure.

I don't see how Batman being serious and brooding helps his villains nor (more importantly) him as a character. If anything, it makes their dynamics dull. What is interesting about seeing his villains interact with an emotionless piece of wood that just silently stares at them and then hits them? And they are just predictably "crazy" and causing random destruction at this point.

This maybe sounds like I hate Batman and his rogues when that's very far from the truth, but I think the actual execution of stories with them these days isn't great. I'd much rather read a Bronze Age Batman vs. Joker story than gimmicky schlock like 3 Jokers.

Batman is simply easier to be adapted. Being more grounded actually helps Batman.

His villains like to have fun. They have this attitude "why do you have to be so serious in preventing me from committing crimes or even murdering people". But for Batman, he is fueled with anger to hit them as much as he can.

3 Jokers is not a great story. It is not a Joker's story. But the thing about Joker is that there are many versions of the character. There cant be a definitive origin for Joker and people prefer that because mystery makes the character more intriguing. Joker is not a character anymore but more like an archetype. Scott Snyder turned Joker into Leatherface and thankfully at the beginning of King's run Joker was turned back to a more normal Joker.

[SiegePerilous02]

Batman is simply easier to be adapted. Being more grounded actually helps Batman.

The success of the MCU proves that characters don't have to be grounded to be adapted well. Plus Aquaman made a billion dollars. There really is no excuse for DC/WB to sleep on all of their other assets in favor of just Batman. It's not as if general audiences have been given much chances to get to know other characters, at least in comparison.

Plus animation makes everything easier.

His villains like to have fun. They have this attitude "why do you have to be so serious in preventing me from committing crimes or even murdering people". But for Batman, he is fueled with anger to hit them as much as he can.

That's not really deep though. Batman's no longer a character with an actual personality (he used to be, and he was great!) and his villains are just doing the same stuff over and over again.

[prepmaster]

The success of the MCU proves that characters don't have to be grounded to be adapted well. Plus Aquaman made a billion dollars. There really is no excuse for DC/WB to sleep on all of their other assets in favor of just Batman. It's not as if general audiences have been given much chances to get to know other characters, at least in comparison.

Plus animation makes everything easier.

That's not really deep though. Batman's no longer a character with an actual personality (he used to be, and he was great!) and his villains are just doing the same stuff over and over again.

But Batman has like TV shows, animation and movies. Way more media exposure throughout decades. Even the phrase "Im Batman" has become iconic. Look at Superman, he was DC's most popular character throughout 20th century but DC fails to make him more popular in modern days. WW has the hype of female superhero in her first movie but it seems to die out now. Avengers has the hype of Thanos. Batman has the hype of not just Batman but other villains like Joker, Catwoman, ect...

Batman used to be more fun for sure. But the way Batman is written, there is that psychological depth behind his actions or reactions. Even actions from his villains are defined by their own traumas as well. The parallel between Batman and his villains is how traumatic experience could make someone empathize with and/or be hateful toward different types of people. Batman fights criminals but also wants to protect innocents while Two-Face kills lawyers, Ivy kills men but sympathizes with abused women, Bane hates bats & prison guards but sympathizes with orphans. They have gone with the route of making Batman more a character that shares his pain to others instead of him feeling empathetic to those that suffer from tragedies. Its still a logical take because if a human being is put through stressful situations on a daily basis or has much anger in them, they tend not be pleasant to be around with. Nevertheless Batman is a character with 8 decades of publishing and various movies, animated shows with him as a protagonist. The problem of rehasing storylines is always there, especially with a villain that draws sales like the Joker. Why tell new stories when old stories still sell well?

[Agent Z]

But Batman has like TV shows, animation and movies. Way more media exposure throughout decades. Even the phrase "Im Batman" has become iconic. Look at Superman, he was DC's most popular character throughout 20th century but DC fails to make him more popular in modern days. WW has the hype of female superhero in her first movie but it seems to die out now. Avengers has the hype of Thanos. Batman has the hype of not just Batman but other villains like Joker, Catwoman, ect...

Batman used to be more fun for sure. But the way Batman is written, there is that psychological depth behind his actions or reactions. How traumatic experience could make someone empathize with or hateful toward different types of people. They have gone with the route of making Batman more a character that shares his pain to others instead of him feeling empathetic to those that suffer from tragedies. Its still a logical take because if a human being is put through stressful situations on a daily basis or has much anger in them, they tend not be pleasant to be around with. Nevertheless Batman is a character with 8 decades of publishing and various movies, animated shows with him as a protagonist. The problem of rehasing storylines is always there, especially with a villain that draws sales like the Joker. Why tell new stories when old stories still sell well?

Avengers didn't just have the hype of Thanos and Superman still has successes on tv and animation. Wonder Woman isn't suffering from dying hype, she's suffering from a contested sequel. Aquaman even managed to surpass previous Batman movies in box office.

You're ignoring a lot of factors here.

[SiegePerilous02]

But Batman has like TV shows, animation and movies. Way more media exposure throughout decades. Even the phrase "Im Batman" has become iconic. Look at Superman, he was DC's most popular character throughout 20th century but DC fails to make him more popular in modern days. WW has the hype of female superhero in her first movie but it seems to die out now. Avengers has the hype of Thanos. Batman has the hype of not just Batman but other villains like Joker, Catwoman, ect...

And it's bad that he's overwhelmingly the one who gets all the content, because it's putting all their eggs in one basket. Never mind the fact that he was considered potential box office poison himself due to Batman & Robin. He's one of their best creations and is popular and enduring for a reason, but he shouldn't be the only one getting attention.

And the problems the other IPs face is down to WB/DC being incredibly unpredictable and at times incompetent. It's not Superman's problem that he isn't as popular as Batman now. That perhaps was always going to happen due to shifting trends, but the gap doesn't have to be as large as it is. The hype leading up to both MoS and BvS pre-release and MoS still doing very well despite its divisive reputation indicates that there is a lot of interest among the general audience for more Superman content, and there is a lot of material adaptations haven't touched yet. Wonder Woman had the hype of being both a solo female hero and a good movie; the sequel is less popular on its own, but that doesn't mean people are sick of her. Batman has more bad movies under his belt than she does.

Aquaman's most notable appearance pre-movie was Superfriends making him a joke, and he made more money than the last movie with "Batman" in the title

Thanos didn't get the hype over night. MCU put the work in, just as the Bat-villains get hype because of constant exposure. Other villains aren't going to get that if WB/DC doesn't actually do the work.

Batman used to be more fun for sure. But the way Batman is written, there is that psychological depth behind his actions or reactions. Even actions from his villains are defined by their own traumas as well. The parallel between Batman and his villains is how traumatic experience could make someone empathize with and/or be hateful toward different types of people. Batman fights criminals but also wants to protect innocents while Two-Face kills lawyers, Ivy kills men but sympathizes with abused women, Bane hates bats & prison guards but sympathizes with orphans. They have gone with the route of making Batman more a character that shares his pain to others instead of him feeling empathetic to those that suffer from tragedies. Its still a logical take because if a human being is put through stressful situations on a daily basis or has much anger in them, they tend not be pleasant to be around with. Nevertheless Batman is a character with 8 decades of publishing and various movies, animated shows with him as a protagonist. The problem of rehasing storylines is always there, especially with a villain that draws sales like the Joker. Why tell new stories when old stories still sell well?

There isn't a lot of psychological depth on average though. Superhero comics aren't very well equipped to tackle the subject of mental illness. Perhaps the only good stance they had was when Morrison corrected their "super sanity" theory from Arkham Asylum in their main Batman run with the Joker's "craziness" just being an elaborate act because he's too mentally competent to be actually insane. It even works with the first story because it's easy to read the doctors theorizing about the Joker being complete quacks. That and a one off issue by Brian K. Vaughn where Batman himself states that most mentally ill people are non-violent and Gotham's breed are something out of the ordinary.

I think the villains can have a lot of depth as characters, as broken people who lash out and become monsters themselves, but their motivations aren't always fleshed out. I think Batman being brooding for them to bounce off of sort of sells him short as a character (at least what he can be) and gives them a bit too much credit.

[Agent Z]

As for the OP, Batman will still remain popular so long as we get movies, shows, games etc. The value of his comics might go down but he is still a strong IP.