Why isnt Supermans cast as popular as Batmans cast in spin offs

[Hoodj]

Yeah!i don't really feel it..She is no where near an alfred(maybe never was).personalitywise she isn't the bluntly honest,no nonesense and reckless type no more which was classic clark kent's opposite(atleast from the outside and some part of him..glasses guy and superman duality comes into play).Not gonna lie when lois is written well is damn great.Jimmy as well who provided children's outlook and later on basically parodied superheroes troupes(even if that wasn't the intention)..Bibbo needs to break the blue collar stereotype.

What i am trying to get at is..you put your main character at the center.Then you branch off by comparing and contrasting as required by the story and it's themes(accidentally jason's death and birth of redhood becoming a defining part of batman lore.. because redhood filled a void of a batman with guns). Otherwise the cast will feel unnecessary.Most of batman's cast fill a neccassity that batman character itself can't.Casts feel lively when there is a give and takes..

Not that i dont agree but i thought some if supermans alts were attempting to branch off his tradtional all american paragon to form into their own niche.

Conner and now Jon were rebelious and carefree youthful fantasies from Clark

Kara(and by extention Linda, Mia and Karen) were female girl power expressions that were all finding their own path takes on superman

Kenan was a asian and flawed take on the man of steel

John Henry was Black Lives Matter and Technology Superman

[Agent Z]

Yeah!i don't really feel it..She is no where near an alfred(maybe never was).personalitywise she isn't the bluntly honest,no nonesense and reckless type no more which was classic clark kent's opposite(atleast from the outside and some part of him..glasses guy and superman duality comes into play).Not gonna lie when lois is written well is damn great.Jimmy as well who provided children's outlook and later on basically parodied superheroes troupes(even if that wasn't the intention)..Bibbo needs to break the blue collar stereotype.

What i am trying to get at is..you put your main character at the center.Then you branch off by comparing and contrasting as required by the story and it's themes(accidentally jason's death and birth of redhood becoming a defining part of batman lore.. because redhood filled a void of a batman with guns). Otherwise the cast will feel unnecessary.Most of batman's cast fill a neccassity that batman character itself can't.Casts feel lively when there is a give and takes..

Lois Lane is arguably the most famous and beloved love interest in superhero media. Alfred isn't known as anything other than Bruce Wayne's butler. Let's not pretend that's anything really special.

As for successful Superman spinoffs, we have a Supergirl show that lasted six seasons. Meanwhile, the other Batgirls spent years in limbo and ignored by adaptations and the Robins never appear in shows or movies as anything other than Batman's sidekicks or part of Titans/Young Justice ensemble. Steel got a movie (albeit a bad one) before Nightwing.

[DABellWrites]

If it was 40/50 years ago and we still lived in world where Lois and Jimmy could sustain a 100+ run OP wouldn't of made the topic in question but we're not and clearly talking in reference to modern day so I don't why you're being deliberately obtuse and my point still stands most of the Superfamily have almost no established relationship or history with each other compared to the Batfamily, PKJ upcoming run will be first time a lot these characters will working and interacting together in a significant capacity.

Then you should mention that it was modern day.

[walk]

Then you should mention that modern day.

Uhh no that's just pedantic, again I don't why you're purposefully being obstinate but since it offering little to actual topic I'll leave you alone to you're minutiae.

[DABellWrites]

Uhh no that's just pedantic, again I don't why you're purposefully being obstinate but since it offering little to actual topic I'll leave you alone to you're minutiae.

You stated that PKJ will be the first person to ever give it ago. I pointed out that it has been done in the past. Yeah, it may not be like Batman, but it has been done. Now, as the contemporary (better word than modern) cast, I will agree because a lot of changes has taken place.

[Jim Kelly]

The Superman family that was popular in the past were his supporting cast of players. Granted Jimmy and Lois had bizarre adventures and sometimes got super-powers--but they were just reporters in the main, not super-heroes. Supergirl got her own series in ACTION and then ADVENTURE and then a short-lived title of her own, before being folded into SUPERMAN FAMILY, but she didn't have the success of Jimmy and Lois. And the character kept going through changes (jobs, cities, creative directions) which is the sure sign a character is in trouble sales-wise.

It's right to say that Batman was more of a family man than Superman. He had his own son, really, in Robin. Although Robin was the only other costumed hero in Gotham City for about fifteen years. And then when other Batman family characters were introduced, they all existed within Batman's own adventures.

But this is because Batman was not as popular as Superman. The popular character is the one that they try to spin off more titles from, so they can make more money. Once Batman gained in popularity, then they tried to spin off more books from the character.

The reason there are more titles featuring the Batman family now is because Batman became the most popular character that the publisher had. And this coincided with a change in how comic books are marketed. The modern strategy is to flood comic book shops with lots and lots of titles, so consumers will be compelled to buy some of those books--rather than concentrating on just one really good title. So the sales might not be high on any, but cumulatively they will sell enough to make a marginal profit. And rather than putting out a variety of titles that appeal to different demographics, putting out all the same titles that appeal to the same demographic.

[Hoodj]

The Superman family that was popular in the past were his supporting cast of players. Granted Jimmy and Lois had bizarre adventures and sometimes got super-powers--but they were just reporters in the main, not super-heroes. Supergirl got her own series in ACTION and then ADVENTURE and then a short-lived title of her own, before being folded into SUPERMAN FAMILY, but she didn't have the success of Jimmy and Lois. And the character kept going through changes (jobs, cities, creative directions) which is the sure sign a character is in trouble sales-wise.

It's right to say that Batman was more of a family man than Superman. He had his own son, really, in Robin. Although Robin was the only other costumed hero in Gotham City for about fifteen years. And then when other Batman family characters were introduced, they all existed within Batman's own adventures.

But this is because Batman was not as popular as Superman. The popular character is the one that they try to spin off more titles from, so they can make more money. Once Batman gained in popularity, then they tried to spin off more books from the character.

The reason there are more titles featuring the Batman family now is because Batman became the most popular character that the publisher had. And this coincided with a change in how comic books are marketed. The modern strategy is to flood comic book shops with lots and lots of titles, so consumers will be compelled to buy some of those books--rather than concentrating on just one really good title. So the sales might not be high on any, but cumulatively they will sell enough to make a marginal profit. And rather than putting out a variety of titles that appeal to different demographics, putting out all the same titles that appeal to the same demographic.

Nice I agree.

[DABellWrites]

The Superman family that was popular in the past were his supporting cast of players. Granted Jimmy and Lois had bizarre adventures and sometimes got super-powers--but they were just reporters in the main, not super-heroes. Supergirl got her own series in ACTION and then ADVENTURE and then a short-lived title of her own, before being folded into SUPERMAN FAMILY, but she didn't have the success of Jimmy and Lois. And the character kept going through changes (jobs, cities, creative directions) which is the sure sign a character is in trouble sales-wise.

It's right to say that Batman was more of a family man than Superman. He had his own son, really, in Robin. Although Robin was the only other costumed hero in Gotham City for about fifteen years. And then when other Batman family characters were introduced, they all existed within Batman's own adventures.

But this is because Batman was not as popular as Superman. The popular character is the one that they try to spin off more titles from, so they can make more money. Once Batman gained in popularity, then they tried to spin off more books from the character.

The reason there are more titles featuring the Batman family now is because Batman became the most popular character that the publisher had. And this coincided with a change in how comic books are marketed. The modern strategy is to flood comic book shops with lots and lots of titles, so consumers will be compelled to buy some of those books--rather than concentrating on just one really good title. So the sales might not be high on any, but cumulatively they will sell enough to make a marginal profit. And rather than putting out a variety of titles that appeal to different demographics, putting out all the same titles that appeal to the same demographic.

Very true!

Controversial statement, but DC Comics has never known what to do with Kara beyond she's Supergirl. She worked having fun stories in Action Comics and Adventure Comics, but they always kept her away from Superman to the point she hasn't ever fully integrated into Superman. I think if you give Kara five or six years alongside Clark, she'd be able to carry a solo book.

[skyvolt2000]

Not that i dont agree but i thought some if supermans alts were attempting to branch off his tradtional all american paragon to form into their own niche.

Conner and now Jon were rebelious and carefree youthful fantasies from Clark

Kara(and by extention Linda, Mia and Karen) were female girl power expressions that were all finding their own path takes on superman

Kenan was a asian and flawed take on the man of steel

John Henry was Black Lives Matter and Technology Superman

Just because he is black does not mean he is BLM.


Superman's supporting cast has always had SOMETHING get in the way of them.

If it's a battle of ownership of who created Superman.

It's they can't find their way into other books for a period of time.

They have to deal with DC's editorial.

Times when they do get into a book-it's a badly done one like the last 20 years of Teen Titans.

Or get in the hands of bad writers-see Conner Kent in Dark Crisis YJ.

Merchandise-I don't have any trouble finding Bat family merch. Outside of Lois, Jimmy, Kara and Clark-it's crap shoot with the rest.

Everybody in the Bat family got trades out.

We are just NOW getting Steel's book in trades. 20+ years later.

There is no Steel or Kenan OGN like there is with Lois, Clark and Kara.

[Jim Kelly]

Very true!

Controversial statement, but DC Comics has never known what to do with Kara beyond she's Supergirl. She worked having fun stories in Action Comics and Adventure Comics, but they always kept her away from Superman to the point she hasn't ever fully integrated into Superman. I think if you give Kara five or six years alongside Clark, she'd be able to carry a solo book.

Yes. In the early stories, it maybe made sense, if Mort wasn't sure about the character--he could just easily remove her without destroying the balance in Metropolis. But later I don't know why--I've read they moved her into ADVENTURE to build up interest in her and in the SUPERBOY comic, because they thought the Legion was taking too much interest away from Supergirl and Superboy. Why Supergirl and Superboy were so important and the Legion wasn't, I'm not sure. Maybe it had something to do with licensing and trademarks.

But if they really wanted to build up interest in Supergirl, they should have moved her to Metropolis where she could interact with her cousin in every issue, just like Jimmy and Lois. Instead--as I'm rereading all the Supergirl stories--they keep moving her around the country. From Midvale Orphanage to the Danvers home in Midvale to Stanhope University to San Francisco (where she works as a reporter for Galaxy, just like Clark) to Vandyre University (in California) to the Experimental School in New Athens, Florida (which is where I'm at in my reading now).

The secret to building up the family franchise is to have the characters all in the same city. In SUPERMAN FAMILY, because it was only bi-monthly at first, Jimmy, Lois and Supergirl took turns being the new feature each issue. Which meant they only got two issues each per year--a big reduction in frequency from what they had enjoyed. But this was probably a cost savings measure as they could fill out the comic with reprints they didn't have to pay for (royalties not existing). At that point they should have done like WORLD'S FINEST when they combined the Superman and Batman features into one. If they had moved Linda to Metropolis, she could have shared family adventures with Jimmy, Lois and Clark.

[DABellWrites]

Yes. In the early stories, it maybe made sense, if Mort wasn't sure about the character--he could just easily remove her without destroying the balance in Metropolis. But later I don't know why--I've read they moved her into ADVENTURE to build up interest in her and in the SUPERBOY comic, because they thought the Legion was taking too much interest away from Supergirl and Superboy. Why Supergirl and Superboy were so important and the Legion wasn't, I'm not sure. Maybe it had something to do with licensing and trademarks.

But if they really wanted to build up interest in Supergirl, they should have moved her to Metropolis where she could interact with her cousin in every issue, just like Jimmy and Lois. Instead--as I'm rereading all the Supergirl stories--they keep moving her around the country. From Midvale Orphanage to the Danvers home in Midvale to Stanhope University to San Francisco (where she works as a reporter for Galaxy, just like Clark) to Vandyre University (in California) to the Experimental School in New Athens, Florida (which is where I'm at in my reading now).

The secret to building up the family franchise is to have the characters all in the same city. In SUPERMAN FAMILY, because it was only bi-monthly at first, Jimmy, Lois and Supergirl took turns being the new feature each issue. Which meant they only got two issues each per year--a big reduction in frequency from what they had enjoyed. But this was probably a cost savings measure as they could fill out the comic with reprints they didn't have to pay for (royalties not existing). At that point they should have done like WORLD'S FINEST when they combined the Superman and Batman features into one. If they had moved Linda to Metropolis, she could have shared family adventures with Jimmy, Lois and Clark.

You're probably right about the merch, Superman was their golden goose at the time and DC was selling all things Super. So, that's the interest they had in Supergirl, it wasn't about her interacting with superman (did she ever appear in the newspaper strips?), more so the appeal to female readers to sell more Superman merch. Which hindered her in the end, as we can tell. Then again, I'm glad she didn't end up as Superman's Robin, like how current DC wants her to be. Kara was her own character.

I don't know how Superman Family would've worked that way, since it was an anthology book, even had The Adventures of Clark Kent and Mr and Mrs. Superman.