Why are Marvel's Superheroines Less Popular overall than Dc's?

[WhiteQueenEmmaFrost]

This title is self explanatory. I saw this topic on a forum called Neogaf And I thought this would help bring up discussion on how to push Marvel Heroines more effectively in the public consciousness by looking at how the competition does it and how to apply it to your own characters.

Personally I think Dc has better Utilized is female characters in Multiple Cartoons and Tv shows more effectively to make sure people have atleast a Vague understanding about who alot of characters are.

DC's been more mainstream in the media.

Batman had a tv show in the 60's, Wonder Woman in the 70's Superman & Batman were successful movie franchises long before Marvel began their studios. I think the only successful early "Marvel" series was the Hulk.

So you've had a good 50 years of DC's women in the spotlight

[portland_breakers101]

I think this is correct. I thought Marvel doesn't promote X-Women merch after the Disney buyout but an older X-Fan told me that apparently even in the 90's, at the height of the franchise's popularity, the women got the short end of the stick when it came to merchandise. That's just pathetic to hear. I saw a reader poll in one of the 90's comics regarding which Marvel character was the most popular and Rogue came 4th only to Spider-Man, Wolverine and Gambit. Storm had actually beaten Wonder Woman in the polling that decided the winner for the match-ups in the Marvel vs. DC crossover. Elektra had beaten Catwoman too. It's tragic to see the popularity of these once great powerhouses being squandered like this.

It's true. And reason why they are put under was because the 1990's is over and Marvel needed to step away from the X-Men.

Back then, that's what caused Marvel to have a problem with the retail. Spider-Man books and X-Men books were the selling fractions along with Punisher, Hulk, She-Hulk, Daredevil, and the Ghost Rider and Blade series as to why they made movies of those I listed in 1998-2007 (before MCU). If you look at that in it's prime,

Blade (1998)
X-Men (2000)
Spider-Man (2002)
Blade II (2002)
X2: X-Men United (2003)
Ang Lee's Hulk (2003)
Daredevil (2003)
Spider-Man 2 (2004)
The Punisher (2004)
Blade: Trinity (2004)
Fantastic Four (2005)
Elektra (2005)
Spider-Man 3 (2006)
X-Men 3: The Last Stand (2006)
Ghost Rider (2007)
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)
Punisher: War Zone (2008)

Before the MCU, those were the Marvel movies we gotten due to the success of those characters in the 1990's. But after seeing what titles that followed up and others didn't do so well, they went and got their hands on Iron Man in 2008.

I think the reason for these B or C-List characters moving up the ladder because in 2010, Disney did purchase Marvel and felt that those characters who didn't get a fair chance in the 1990's should be moved up. Marvel Comics in the 2000's was trying to push Iron Man, Carol Danvers/Captain Marvel, Captain America, reimaged the Hulk by World War Hulk after Ang Lee's film adaptation of Hulk (2003) failed, and they tried to even push the Inhumans in different times from 2000, 2004-2005, and 2008. Now they are finally trying to mess with these B to C-List characters and it seems like they are falling flat because they are pulling a Disney card type treatment when writing them.

The sad thing about this is that the movies I listed from 1998-2007 before 2010 MCU were popular 1990's comics that they released by 2000's.

Sadly, I like Captain Marvel/Carol Danvers and I think she should get a push, but with the writing and art direction right now, it's safe to say that web comic people are not the most frugal to hire if you know what I mean.

[The_Greatest_Username]

Welp, DC did have the benefit of being able to see the backlash Marvel got over this.

That's true, but it wasn't always like that for Marvel. Back when the X-Men movie came out, all the female characters were present in the toy line. It's just strange to me that things changed so much.

[butterflykyss]

I think characters like Jean Grey, Rogue, and Storm would have been more popular today had Marvel not sold the rights to the Xmen. The non-Xmen related females (IMO) don't resonate with the masses like the aforementioned three characters I mentioned do. Marvel had a great opportunity to push Storm and be a leader in terms of featuring female characters back in the 90s with Storm, but dropped the ball tremendously. Fast forward to today and it's nice to see more diversity with color and women characters but it simply is going to take time. Making Captain Marvel the "it" girl won't happening by shoving her down people's throats. Maybe after the movie things will be different but ultimately to have iconic characters like Jean, Rogue, and Ororo you need to make stories people care about and connect to. In the case of females currently pushed at Marvel I don't see people caring or connecting with these characters and that is why they are less popular.

[portland_breakers101]

I think characters like Jean Grey, Rogue, and Storm would have been more popular today had Marvel not sold the rights to the Xmen. The non-Xmen related females (IMO) don't resonate with the masses like the aforementioned three characters I mentioned do. Marvel had a great opportunity to push Storm and be a leader in terms of featuring female characters back in the 90s with Storm, but dropped the ball tremendously. Fast forward to today and it's nice to see more diversity with color and women characters but it simply is going to take time. Making Captain Marvel the "it" girl won't happening by shoving her down people's throats. Maybe after the movie things will be different but ultimately to have iconic characters like Jean, Rogue, and Ororo you need to make stories people care about and connect to. In the case of females currently pushed at Marvel I don't see people caring or connecting with these characters and that is why they are less popular.

True, but the problem was that you can't really give those three girls a solo comic. You have to really bring in a villain from the X-Men and have to have some of the X-Men as co-stars in order to make them. However, that doesn't seem to work as Jean Grey, Rogue, and Storm does not have a rogue gallery. So you have to utilize the whole X-Men.

It works for Spider-Woman back in the late 70's to early 80's was because she had a odd rogue gallery that I just do not want to get into. Nekra, Morgan Le Fay, Brother Grimm, High Evolutionary, and more (I am not going to name all of them) were her rogues. Ok there was one called Turner D. Century which was quite hilarious to be honest. Jessica Drew fought odd jobbers and rogues.

So with Rogue, you have to really think very deep of her rogue's gallery which would just end up being her, Mystique, a rivalry with Carol Danvers/Captain Marvel, and Sentinels

Jean Grey/Phoenix would just be her love triangle with Cyclops and Wolverine. Other than that, she had many problems with Professor X and such.

Storm is just, ehhh! Shadow King and that's it. BUT MANY X-MEN MEMBERS FOUGHT THE SHADOW KING. Hell, Kree, Skrull, Inhumans fought the Brood before. Starjammers and Summer's himself fought the Brood. So yeah, what villains does Storm have by herself? None.

That is similar to Invisible Woman. As much as I kind of like Sue Storm, she was meant to be part of the Fantastic Four.

Sif is wishy washy. They seem to use her and put her aside and then use her again and put her aside once again. I do not understand that, but oh well.

Like I said, Marvel needs to dig into some of the stuff they required back in 1995 or 1996 and maybe they should ask Barr to,

ultra_mantra.jpg

[Conch22]

I wouldn't say that's necessarily true. Rogue did have a solo series that lasted a year and half if I recall correctly.

Most of the X-men characters with solo series had villains originate in their titles (Cable with GW Bridge and the circle killer, Gambit with the Pig, the Executioner and the New Son, Deadpool with Ajax, T-Ray and whoever else pops up in his title, Nate Grey with Holocaust, Sugar Man and I believe he dealt with elemental beings later on, Bishop with the District X cast and The ChronoMaster (a reimagined Trevor Fitzroy), Wolverine with Roughhouse, Bloodscream, Ogun and Shingen. I believe all the villains in the Rucka run, aside from Sabretooth, were created in his solo series. Not to mention prior to Rucka there was a Vatican assassin villain that sticks out.)

I'd say it's less needing villains established in the X-men line than just needing a good mix of old and new

[Frontier]

Who isn't a hero. She's a civilian supporting character.

So she's basically Marvel's Lois Lane .

Not too shabby if I do say so myself .

[portland_breakers101]

I wouldn't say that's necessarily true. Rogue did have a solo series that lasted a year and half if I recall correctly.

Most of the X-men characters with solo series had villains originate in their titles (Cable with GW Bridge and the circle killer, Gambit with the Pig, the Executioner and the New Son, Deadpool with Ajax, T-Ray and whoever else pops up in his title, Nate Grey with Holocaust, Sugar Man and I believe he dealt with elemental beings later on, Bishop with the District X cast and The ChronoMaster (a reimagined Trevor Fitzroy), Wolverine with Roughhouse, Bloodscream, Ogun and Shingen. I believe all the villains in the Rucka run, aside from Sabretooth, were created in his solo series. Not to mention prior to Rucka there was a Vatican assassin villain that sticks out.)

I'd say it's less needing villains established in the X-men line than just needing a good mix of old and new

No no no! Wolverine had Sabertooth, Omega Red, Cyber. Those two villains you just named sound like 90's characters.

Rogue's series did well because most of the supporting cast were popular X-Men members and yeah, she had some villains, but most were X-Men villains and some were the come upings of small new ones.

I will be honest that I am not a fan of the X-Men women as much as I like the X-Men males like Cyclops, Wolverine, Beast, Ice-Man, Colossus, etc the girls to me are just filler and the guys make the team more due to their personality.

[MikaelNovasun]

No no no! Wolverine had Sabertooth, Omega Red, Cyber. Those two villains you just named sound like 90's characters.

Rogue's series did well because most of the supporting cast were popular X-Men members and yeah, she had some villains, but most were X-Men villains and some were the come upings of small new ones.

I will be honest that I am not a fan of the X-Men women as much as I like the X-Men males like Cyclops, Wolverine, Beast, Ice-Man, Colossus, etc the girls to me are just filler and the guys make the team more due to their personality.

A hero's rogue gallery has little to do with it. Any antagonist will work as long as the book is well written and the art is good. It just takes time to establish the character, you can't force it like Marvel has been trying to do with Captain Marvel. And as far as Rogue needing X-Men supporting cast and villians she is the lead on one of the best selling Marvel books that has yet to feature an X-Men villian. Rogue hasn't been part of the X-Men teams for a couple of years now and it has resulted in some of her best characterization in years.

[Carabas]

That's true, but it wasn't always like that for Marvel. Back when the X-Men movie came out, all the female characters were present in the toy line. It's just strange to me that things changed so much.

Fellow on the previous page (as well as my admittedly vague memories) say this is not so.

Okay, sure, they made them, but they were rare, like one Storm for every five Cyclopses or so in a sealed box of action figures.

[gurkle]

Apart from Marvel not having a Wonder Woman (DC doesn't have another Wonder Woman, either; she's unique and so is her creator), Marvel didn't do many solo pushes for any characters during its 1980s peak. They were heavily focused on team books. So they have a ton of Martian Manhunter type of characters, who are mostly only known as part of a team.

So Wolverine, the ultimate breakout character, did not receive his own solo ongoing comic until he'd been in X-Men for over a dozen years. None of the other X-Men, male or female, got their own comics. And it takes time to spin off a character and make them a solo star and give them their own supporting cast and mythology. Characters like Catwoman and Harley Quinn and Supergirl are famous, but they wouldn't be famous if they'd been given one miniseries or one ongoing and then went right back to being supporting characters forever. Trying to make the Marvel team-book heroines into stars now isn't impossible, but it's certainly much harder than it would have been if they'd started in the '80s.

As to why Marvel didn't work harder on this... I recall being told by someone who worked at Marvel that the feeling at the company in the '80s was that most solo books weren't good sales risks compared to teams. I don't know how reliable that is. But Marvel in the '70s through the '90s had very tight continuity, and that may have been a factor. DC's characters are mostly older and from a time when it didn't matter so much if Batman did one thing in his own comic and another thing in a team or team-up comic. But when Wolverine got his limited series in the '80s, he actually had to leave the X-Men for a while so he could go to Japan. Vision and Scarlet Witch got two limited series in the '80s and both times they left the Avengers so they would be exclusive to their own book. If you don't want a solo book to contradict the team book, then the only way to give (say) Storm her own comic would have been to take her out of X-Men for a while, thereby probably hurting the X-Men comic for the sake of a book that probably wouldn't sell.

[portland_breakers101]

Apart from Marvel not having a Wonder Woman (DC doesn't have another Wonder Woman, either; she's unique and so is her creator), Marvel didn't do many solo pushes for any characters during its 1980s peak. They were heavily focused on team books. So they have a ton of Martian Manhunter type of characters, who are mostly only known as part of a team.

So Wolverine, the ultimate breakout character, did not receive his own solo ongoing comic until he'd been in X-Men for over a dozen years. None of the other X-Men, male or female, got their own comics. And it takes time to spin off a character and make them a solo star and give them their own supporting cast and mythology. Characters like Catwoman and Harley Quinn and Supergirl are famous, but they wouldn't be famous if they'd been given one miniseries or one ongoing and then went right back to being supporting characters forever. Trying to make the Marvel team-book heroines into stars now isn't impossible, but it's certainly much harder than it would have been if they'd started in the '80s.

As to why Marvel didn't work harder on this... I recall being told by someone who worked at Marvel that the feeling at the company in the '80s was that most solo books weren't good sales risks compared to teams. I don't know how reliable that is. But Marvel in the '70s through the '90s had very tight continuity, and that may have been a factor. DC's characters are mostly older and from a time when it didn't matter so much if Batman did one thing in his own comic and another thing in a team or team-up comic. But when Wolverine got his limited series in the '80s, he actually had to leave the X-Men for a while so he could go to Japan. Vision and Scarlet Witch got two limited series in the '80s and both times they left the Avengers so they would be exclusive to their own book. If you don't want a solo book to contradict the team book, then the only way to give (say) Storm her own comic would have been to take her out of X-Men for a while, thereby probably hurting the X-Men comic for the sake of a book that probably wouldn't sell.

You spoke part of my language there. See, that is what Marvel is about. They are more team oriented since the Fantastic Four (1961) because they had made better villains through that.

That is what I have seen. See, Batgirl was good a supporting character. Catwoman had her own comic from 1993-2001 and volume 2 from 2002-2006 or however long it was. But after that, she had to be the anchor for the Batman series. So bringing her back in and canceling her solo was good. Same with Harley Quinn. She has to be the anchor for the Batman and Suicide Squad series as well as Gotham City Sirens which is why those team books work for Harley Quinn.

Wonder Woman worked by herself. Supergirl does at time. It depends on how she is written. Both Wonder Woman and Supergirl was not doing good by the time 1982 rolled in and right in Crisis on Infinite Earths (1985) you wondered why both Wonder Woman and Supergirl got killed off in that story. Total reboot on both giving Wonder Woman the more Greek type stories and then Supergirl was reintroduced as a shape shifting goop name Matrix.

By the time of 2004 and then 2010 respectfully, Supergirl and Wonder Woman got a REALLY big overhaul. They are trying to focus more on the aspect of the character and where they can go from there. Supergirl gotten better, Wonder Woman sort of did until her movie came out.

So the only two that seems untouchable are Wonder Woman and Supergirl. Same with goes for Robin too. See when you have Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Wayne's sidekick and Superman's cousin is there. Wonder Woman doesn't really need that. With that said, Robin and Supergirl are A-List Secondary characters.

Now with Marvel, they do not have that. I will show you what they have,

Spider-Man ---> Many different Spider-Women (Jessica, Julia, the little girl Arana, Mattie Franklin, etc)
Hulk ---> There is the ever popular She-Hulk, but she will always be connected to the Hulk series.
Captain Mar-Vell ---> Carol Danvers Captain Marvel when she was Ms. Marvel
Adam Warlock (Him) ---> Kismet (Her)

AND WAIT, on a team book didn't Jean Grey had a distaff or a A or B-List sidekick. Yeah, Rachel Grey Summers. She spent some time with Excalibur in the late 80's to the 90's.

So therefore, it seems that Marvel can't produce a solo female because their focus was on team books. Only further they went to that was She-Hulk; problem with her is she is a distaff counterpart, but works. Then there is Silver Sable, everyone forgotten about her. What about Elektra at times? Then there are many approaches to making solo Jessica Jones stories, but some people are thrown off to it.

[portland_breakers101]

A hero's rogue gallery has little to do with it. Any antagonist will work as long as the book is well written and the art is good. It just takes time to establish the character, you can't force it like Marvel has been trying to do with Captain Marvel. And as far as Rogue needing X-Men supporting cast and villians she is the lead on one of the best selling Marvel books that has yet to feature an X-Men villian. Rogue hasn't been part of the X-Men teams for a couple of years now and it has resulted in some of her best characterization in years.

Well that is right. Marvel should of took their time with Carol Danvers and developed her much more. I know she came out in 1967, but remember from 1992-1999 she has not been in any stories to be quite frank. She was placed on the back burner since then. I'd say 1978-1992 was her shinning point. 1978-1982 was her time as Ms. Marvel and then from 1984-1992 she went around as Binary. Then afterwards, she was back to being Carol.

I didn't know how Chris Claremont felt about the Carol Danvers character, but he felt that she might need just be a supporting character from what he was thinking. Same went with Spider-Woman (Jessica Drew), but that didn't stop Jim Shooter to reveal his Girl Gang of Colorado with Julia Carpenter, Titania, and Volcana. Now Volcana is forgettable because no one hardly remembers her at all. But from 1984-2000 we had the second Spider-Woman for awhile. During that, she did feature along with Jessica Drew in the third Spider-Woman series which Mattie Franklin was the headliner. Jessica and Mattie headline in their own comics. Why not Julia Carpenter? Strange thing, right?

As far as other females, Marvel needs to really put emphasis on their villains, but it seems the Fantastic Four and X-Men have better villains along with Spider-Man who has a numerous amount of A-List villains.

By the 2000's, I can see why Marvel was saving their other characters by bringing over Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, and X-Men villains was because Iron Man, Carol Danvers (Captain Marvel), Captain America, etc do not have great or memorable villains only if they are on the team.

Sadly that's what I see in Marvel.

[Seren]

DC market them better than Marvel does.

[portland_breakers101]

DC market them better than Marvel does.

Exactly. Agreed.