Has Batman (and the DCU) been coasting off of Superman?

[[]D[]/\/\[]D @ Nite/So-tite]

These days Batman is seen as iconic. Still, how much has his association with with Superman factored into this?

How much of Batman's popularity is a result of Superman? Would Bats even be anywhere close to capable of headlining all of the DC properties?

And how many of DC's other properties benefited from Superman's existence? Hal Jordan/Green Lanterns in general? Wonder Woman? Captain Marvel, etc? Do you consider them riding on Supes' coattails? Would Batman (and all of the other DC characters and the DCU itself) be as popular if Superman and his popularity were taken out of the equation from the beginning? Would each or any of these characters have been able to garner their current level of popularity on their own?

Explain your reasons for yes or no.

[Patient Boy]

I'd say much the opposite. I don't have figures with me unfortunately, but I believe Batman is much more profitable for DC than Superman (if anybody does have figures, and if they prove my assertion wrong I apologise in advance).

If you mean in a "Superman is the first" and everybody from Batman to B'wana Beast owes him a debt of gratitude for their very existence then yes I'd say that's true but I don't see that any character is riding on Superman's coattails. Batman would easily be as popular if Superman were removed from the DCU tomorrow (although I guess the Superman/ Batman title would have to be cancelled).

[Jack Zodiac]

No, Batman doesn't. The rest of the DCU, however, is directly inspired by the success of Superman, who is the first (technically), most popular of the spandex-wearing circus strongman superheroes. He was the first character created to attain that kind of popularity, and remains the strongest, most popular franchise to date (I'm sure that all of the Superman merchandise, toys and clothes, and the media income from various live-action series, cartoons, and movies over the years are higher than Batman's).

Batman, though, managed to survive his own franchise independently from Superman for almost as long, with various movies and television series, cartoons, action figures, clothes, etc., and as a superhero is more strongly inspired by characters like The Phantom, The Shadow, and Zorro than Superman, whom most superheroes after himself were modeled.

[botch]

No, Batman doesn't. The rest of the DCU, however, is directly inspired by the success of Superman, who is the first (technically), most popular of the spandex-wearing circus strongman superheroes. He was the first character created to attain that kind of popularity, and remains the strongest, most popular franchise to date (I'm sure that all of the Superman merchandise, toys and clothes, and the media income from various live-action series, cartoons, and movies over the years are higher than Batman's).

Batman, though, managed to survive his own franchise independently from Superman for almost as long, with various movies and television series, cartoons, action figures, clothes, etc., and as a superhero is more strongly inspired by characters like The Phantom, The Shadow, and Zorro than Superman, whom most superheroes after himself were modeled.

Yeah sure Superman has been popular the longest etc but in the last 10-15 years he has been famous but not popular, X-men was more popular and then no doubt Spider-man is the most popular franchise there is that isn't Star Wars or Harry Potter.

[Libaax]

Batman doesnt need Superman. He is as big on his own. He might have needed supes in the 30's but not now.

Heck he has supported many more comics on his name than supes.

These days supe is almost more popular in his tv shows,movies than in his comics.

[Jack Zodiac]

Yeah sure Superman has been popular the longest etc but in the last 10-15 years he has been famous but not popular, X-men was more popular and then no doubt Spider-man is the most popular franchise there is that isn't Star Wars or Harry Potter.

Famous =/= popular?

Measuring success in sales, Superman as a franchise buries every superhero franchise. Even outside of his many live-action series and movies, animated features, comics and video games and action figures over the years, every single piece of clothing that bears the Superman logo, every coaster, mug, checkbook, money clip, lunch box, toothbrush, pair of sneakers, kitchen magnet, bumper sticker, every pack of cheap candies that has Superman's face or logo on it earns DC and Time Warner money. And all of that adds up to a whole lot more than Batman, Spider-Man, the X-Men, or any other forty year old franchise.

Batman doesnt need Superman. He is as big on his own. He might have needed supes in the 30's but not now.

Heck he has supported many more comics on his name than supes.

These days supe is almost more popular in his tv shows,movies than in his comics.

Batman never needed Superman, his success stemmed from a different kind of fanbase for superhero comics. But you're wrong about him sporting more titles. Alfred and Vicky Vale never had their own books, but Jimmy Olsen and Lois Lane did. And once again, critical popularity does not equal financial success. As a franchise, as a money making enterprise, Superman has been making more money for a whole lot longer than Spider-Man, the Hulk, the X-Men, Batman, Wonder Woman, or any other superhero on the market.

"He's bigger than Jesus."

[botch]

Famous =/= popular?

Measuring success in sales, Superman as a franchise buries every superhero franchise. Even outside of his many live-action series and movies, animated features, comics and video games and action figures over the years, every single piece of clothing that bears the Superman logo, every coaster, mug, checkbook, money clip, lunch box, toothbrush, pair of sneakers, kitchen magnet, bumper sticker, every pack of cheap candies that has Superman's face or logo on it earns DC and Time Warner money. And all of that adds up to a whole lot more than Batman, Spider-Man, the X-Men, or any other forty year old franchise.



Batman never needed Superman, his success stemmed from a different kind of fanbase for superhero comics. But you're wrong about him sporting more titles. Alfred and Vicky Vale never had their own books, but Jimmy Olsen and Lois Lane did. And once again, critical popularity does not equal financial success. As a franchise, as a money making enterprise, Superman has been making more money for a whole lot longer than Spider-Man, the Hulk, the X-Men, Batman, Wonder Woman, or any other superhero on the market.

"He's bigger than Jesus."

I said last 10-15 years, of course i don't count the entire history, how do you compare spider-man to a book that once sold 1,000,000 copies an issue.

I'm talking now. and famous does not equal popular. famous is known, popular means loved/liked. Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan are mega famous, but no one sees their movies. There's the difference. Everyone knows who Supes is but people buy X-men and Spider-man comics, the kids prefer the spider-man toys and movies etc.

[Jack Zodiac]

Nah, I think Superman's popularity precedes comic sales of box office success. Ask someone who isn't a comic book fan who their favorite superhero is and they'll either say Superman, Batman, or Spider-Man, but I can bet ya' that more than thirty-three percent (probably a whole lot more) are going to say Superman. Because fame does equal popularity.

[HouseSolo]

Nah, I think Superman's popularity precedes comic sales of box office success. Ask someone who isn't a comic book fan who their favorite superhero is and they'll either say Superman, Batman, or Spider-Man, but I can bet ya' that more than thirty-three percent (probably a whole lot more) are going to say Superman. Because fame does equal popularity.

Exactly. There are decent amount of people who don't know Spider-man, and a fair amount of people who don't know Batman. But people that don't know Superman? They're few and far between.

[Libaax]

Those people who know Superman more often than spidey and Batman.

They dont buy comics, so who cares really about them. Thats why i said he is more famous for his movies,tv shows.

Before i read comics, i thought Superman was the only famous comics hero cause of his movies,Reeves. Doesnt mean i have ever bought a supe comic.


Thats why sales wise he isnt the biggest as you might think.

Big time fame outside comics doesnt mean sales numbers. Box office his movie didnt even do better Batman and Batman is younger in movie medium and mainstream fame. Not even near spidey movies who are huge and in top ten alltime list.

So i dont agree with Famous = popular

Im starting to think he is like shakespeare, everyone knows his name but not as many care more about him enough to make his comics,movies as big as his name.

[Jack Zodiac]

They dont buy comics, so who cares really about them.

DC and Time Warner, because they make a whole lot more money off of the people who don't buy comics than us schmucks that do.