DC’s Lack of Female Led Franchises!?

[Vakanai]

Wasn't really my cup of tea, and I think after Rebirth when they changed the creative team, it wasn't that popular anymore.

And I don't deny there were some good runs, but most of them where pretty meh and some where really bad (like the New 52 Catwoman). But overall I think male lead Batbooks had on average the better writing.

It was still popular with the original creative team at the time. They still even use that version of her costume in a lot of adaptations. So it should count.

[CosmiComic]

It takes more then pushing a character to create a franchise. Franchise is as much about supporting characters and villains, as it is about the main characters. Most of the characters people are naming are team characters. I’ve noticed team characters tend to be created in a different way then solo characters.

Team characters tend to be built in a way that makes them reliant on being on a team. They rarely have their own supporting cast, because team members usually perform the roles that a supporting cast would usually play. There “villains” are usually team villains and thus usually feel less personal to them in particular.

Even their powers seem to be more team oriented. I’ve noticed that heroes on teams tend to be specialists power wise. This is a result of being designed from the beginning to be a part of a whole. Solo heroes on the other hand tend to have more generalist power sets. This isn’t universally true, but it does go to show why characters like the Xmen’s Cyclops or Cyborg tend to fizzle as solo acts.

The only acception are Avengers/JLA style all star teams. Which are essentially a group of solo heroes teaming up. But even there, their is an obvious difference between how characters who are solo heroes like Superman are written, and how characters like Fire and Ice are written.

Don't very few heroes actually have their own villains and supporting cast though?

[Vakanai]

Don't very few heroes actually have their own villains and supporting cast though?

Most of the main solo heroes do. Those that can't support their own book, don't.
The fact that most heroes don't support their own book, and the bulk of female heroes fall into that category, is a problem.
But ideally a problem DC is willing to tackle.

[El_Gato]

Most of the main solo heroes do. Those that can't support their own book, don't.
The fact that most heroes don't support their own book, and the bulk of female heroes fall into that category, is a problem.
But ideally a problem DC is willing to tackle.

Not just their female heroes but their POC characters as well, though with Kyle, John and Jaime its a lot stronger of a list. Though going by OP criteria only Jaime counts since the others share a mantle and aren’t the alpha

[I'm a Fish]

Don't very few heroes actually have their own villains and supporting cast though?

I suppose if you take into account every hero, then yes. But like what Mathew101281 said, heroes are more likely to have their own supporting cast and villains if they started out in their own book and not a team book, and to add to that, aren't spin-offs of other characters.

That's probably why Wonder Woman is the only female hero who has a somewhat well-known rouges gallery. Catwoman has had multiple volumes but most couldn't name a Catwoman villain off the top of their head. I bet even with Harley most people would say her main villain is Punchline or Joker... even her own show doesn't give her her own villains.

Marvel likes to shuffle their villains around. They leave Spider-Man and X-Men villains alone (for the most part).

[CosmiComic]

I suppose if you take into account every hero, then yes. But like what Mathew101281 said, heroes are more likely to have their own supporting cast and villains if they started out in their own book and not a team book, and to add to that, aren't spin-offs of other characters.

That's probably why Wonder Woman is the only female hero who has a somewhat well-known rouges gallery. Catwoman has had multiple volumes but most couldn't name a Catwoman villain off the top of their head. I bet even with Harley most people would say her main villain is Punchline or Joker... even her own show doesn't give her her own villains.

Marvel likes to shuffle their villains around. They leave Spider-Man and X-Men villains alone (for the most part).

I see what you're saying. Although Catwoman and Harley are villains themselves, aren't they?

My main point is I feel it's a bit unreasonable to expect every hero to have their own iconic or notable antagonists and supporting cast. For instance, at most Hal Jordan has Carol Ferris, who's quasi-villainous and not nearly as well known as Lois or even Lana. And he's the most important Green Lantern. Who are the most recognizable cast members for Guy, John, or Kyle? Maybe DC shouldn't rely on the model of giving everyone their own support, or maybe they should actually make more effort into giving every major hero their own Jimmy olsen or Lex Luthor. At this point I'm not sure

[El_Gato]

I suppose if you take into account every hero, then yes. But like what Mathew101281 said, heroes are more likely to have their own supporting cast and villains if they started out in their own book and not a team book, and to add to that, aren't spin-offs of other characters.

That's probably why Wonder Woman is the only female hero who has a somewhat well-known rouges gallery. Catwoman has had multiple volumes but most couldn't name a Catwoman villain off the top of their head. I bet even with Harley most people would say her main villain is Punchline or Joker... even her own show doesn't give her her own villains.

Marvel likes to shuffle their villains around. They leave Spider-Man and X-Men villains alone (for the most part).

Same goes for Supergirl, Batgirl...etc. they’re spin-offs and rely on Batman/Superman villains and support characters. Zatanna and Black Canary aren’t spin-offs but they’re cemented as team players.

I think Vixen and Amethyst, as others have said here, have the most potential for a franchise. If only Dc put as much effort into them as they do the spin-off Bat/Super characters.

[CosmiComic]

Same goes for Supergirl, Batgirl...etc. they’re spin-offs and rely on Batman/Superman villains and support characters. Zatanna and Black Canary aren’t spin-offs but they’re cemented as team players.

I think Vixen and Amethyst, as others have said here, have the most potential for a franchise. If only Dc put as much effort into them as they do the spin-off Bat/Super characters.

Maybe DC shouldn't have given every other good villain to Batman

[Vakanai]

Not just their female heroes but their POC characters as well, though with Kyle, John and Jaime its a lot stronger of a list. Though going by OP criteria only Jaime counts since the others share a mantle and aren’t the alpha

This is one reason I'm pleased with their YA efforts and expanding outside the comic book shops. More women and POC characters do better outside the traditional comic book shop bubble. Out there they have a chance to expand.

[Darkspellmaster]

Amethyst Gemworld is a strong concept that deserves development
Black Orchid (Alba Garcia) with her connection to the Red, Green, and Rot plus Argus
Zatanna Expand on Mystic University, she’s more than Constantine love interest
Vixen Easy choice. Make her a princess of Zambesi and really expand on the Anazi mythology
Huntress Her darker vigilante way of thinking would be a good series. Take on mob bosses and cartels, take her out of Gotham too

All good choices but I would say dig into the past and pull up some older female leads as well in the DC Base, Like Liberty Belle and others. No reason you can't dig into the Golden Age and build them up. Like Phantom Lady you can update her and build her as a interesting hero.

Vixen and Amethyst are good ones to start with and I'm damn sure Mari can be as big a name as Diana and Dinah. And agree that Amethyst needs to be a cartoon. Give it a series like Dragon Prince or Avatar and there will be a ton of people coming in to watch it.

[I'm a Fish]

I see what you're saying. Although Catwoman and Harley are villains themselves, aren't they?

Catwoman is an anti-hero at this point, and DC certainly tries (and fails) to have Harley as more of an anti-hero.

My main point is I feel it's a bit unreasonable to expect every hero to have their own iconic or notable antagonists and supporting cast. For instance, at most Hal Jordan has Carol Ferris, who's quasi-villainous and not nearly as well known as Lois or even Lana. And he's the most important Green Lantern. Who are the most recognizable cast members for Guy, John, or Kyle? Maybe DC shouldn't rely on the model of giving everyone their own support, or maybe they should actually make more effort into giving every major hero their own Jimmy olsen or Lex Luthor. At this point I'm not sure

All those Green Lanterns are spin-offs/legacy character, so like most characters in that class their villains are passed down. They all usually deal with the same problems and the same premises with slight variations, which is to be expected since they are part of a space police force.

But yeah, at this point it's much harder to give character's their own long lasting rouges and supporting cast. You're more likely to get a new character off the ground if they appear in a TV show.

Edit: It is easier though, if you are your own IP. Since no one expects a Superman character or villain to appear in an Amethyst comic like they do with Supergirl.

[CosmiComic]

Catwoman is an anti-hero at this point, and DC certainly tries (and fails) to have Harley as more of an anti-hero.



All those Green Lanterns are spin-offs/legacy character, so like most characters in that class their villains are passed down. They all usually deal with the same problems and the same premises with slight variations, which is to be expected since they are part of a space police force.

But yeah, at this point it's much harder to give character's their own long lasting rouges and supporting cast. You're more likely to get a new character off the ground if they appear in a TV show.

Edit: It is easier though, if you are your own IP. Since no one expects a Superman character or villain to appear in an Amethyst comic like they do with Supergirl.

Maybe DC should focus more on mini-teams of 3 to 4. They can share the same villains but get time devoted to each hero.

[I'm a Fish]

Maybe DC should focus more on mini-teams of 3 to 4. They can share the same villains but get time devoted to each hero.

Do the Brave and the Bold but with Wonder Woman teaming up with other ladies.

[Agent Z]

Same goes for Supergirl, Batgirl...etc. they’re spin-offs and rely on Batman/Superman villains and support characters. Zatanna and Black Canary aren’t spin-offs but they’re cemented as team players.

I think Vixen and Amethyst, as others have said here, have the most potential for a franchise. If only Dc put as much effort into them as they do the spin-off Bat/Super characters.

Supergirl actually has a lot of her own villains and Cass Cain had her own rogues gallery.

[Badou]

Yeah Raven is a good pick, both her and Starfire are extremely popular and have enough mythology in their origin worth exploring! Plus they’re not derivative characters either!

I'd say Raven more than Starfire. Raven is a human, has magic, connected to a fairly big villain in Trigon, and can fit into a lot more traditionally popular stories. She can be a teen in a school setting like in her OGN, she can be used in the magic side of the DCU, and so on. I can envision her as her own franchise. It is a lot more relatable and can translate more easily into more mainstream stories. Starfire is an alien that lacks utility for solo stories and needs those other strong established characters to support her I think. So I don't think Starfire would really work as a solo hero in her own franchise that well. The whole young female super powered alien coming to Earth and having to adapt to life there is kind of done better by Supergirl too.