# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the epic poem "The Odyssey," which was written in the 8th century B.C., Greek warrior Odysseus becomes lost on his way home from the 10-year-long Trojan War and spends an additional 10 years fighting monsters and sorcerers and resisting temptations -- all so he can return home to protect his wife and family from men who are attempting to steal their fortune. During the story, Odysseus unflinchingly accepts divine punishment for his men's misdeeds, and relies on his guile and determination to survive. Most importantly, even though Odysseus knows the gods control his fate, he fearlessly struggles to return home to save the ones he loves.

To the Greeks, Odysseus was a hero, a word that is derived from the Ancient Greek term for "protector." But he was more than just that. The brave captain embodied the virtues and attributes that Greek society cherished and he provided a model for Greek people to emulate.

It's probably safe to say that most people in the modern world no longer fear that monsters lurk in unknown islands. But their need for fearless heroes has never faded. These days, some of our champions are soldiers who've shown valor in war, and astronauts who've risked their lives to explore space. We also see heroism in people who make life-saving medical discoveries, dedicate their careers to helping the poor and underprivileged, or labor to right social injustices. Therefore, in a greater sense, polio conqueror Dr. Jonas Salk, Mother Theresa and Martin Luther King, Jr., have a lot in common with ancient Odysseus.

We need heroes because they define the limits of our aspirations, writes Santa Clara University ethics scholar Scott LaBarge. To paraphrase his words, we define our ideals by the heroes we choose, and in turn, our ideals (courage and honor, for example) define us. Heroes symbolize the qualities we'd like to possess and the ambitions we'd like to satisfy [source: LaBarge]. For instance, a person who chooses women's rights crusader Susan B. Anthony as a hero will have a very different sense of what human excellence involves than someone who chooses, say, a model/actress contestant on a reality TV show [source: LaBarge].

Still, certain qualities tend to stand out as particularly heroic. For example, a Cornell University business school study of 526 World War II combat veterans found that the 83 individuals who were decorated for battlefield valor described themselves as loyal, self-disciplined, selfless and adventurous [source: Wansick, et al]. Other researchers have identified those same characteristics in leaders who transform organizations and societies.

Heroes are often brave and capable of leading others, and they resolve problems that confront society. And, importantly, they also tend to be risk-takers. According Temple University educational psychology professor Frank Farley, many heroic historical figures (think Franklin D. Roosevelt and Martin Luther King) are T-type personalities -- that is, habitual thrill-seekers who don't hesitate to place themselves in personal peril to accomplish a goal. Since many people don't take huge risks, they admire this quality in another person, and are even drawn to follow him or her [source: Psychology Today].

"Society is founded on hero worship," the 19th⁻ century historian Thomas Carlyle once observed. Many people still believe that today and strive to make sure that people who embody the best values of our culture are held up as objects of admiration. Since 1904, for example, the Carnegie Hero Fund Commission has issued more than 9,000 medals to people who've risked their lives -- and in some cases perished -- in order to save another person from life-threatening peril.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the epic poem "The Odyssey," which was written in the 8th century B.C., Greek warrior Odysseus becomes lost on his way home from the 10-year-long Trojan War and spends an additional 10 years fighting monsters and sorcerers and resisting temptations -- all so he can return home to protect his wife and family from men who are attempting to steal their fortune.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Scott T. Allison and George R. Goethals
People often ask us why we need heroes. Although the phrase " why we need them" is in the subtitle of our first HEROES book, we've never really offered a succinct list of the many reasons why heroes are so important to us. Here we aim to do just that, hoping you'll forgive us for offering up yet another top-10 list.

Below we've assembled 10 major reasons why people need heroes. This list isn't meant to be exhaustive by any means. But it's a good start. Here goes:

1. We're born to have heroes - More than a half-century ago, Carl Jung proposed the idea that all humans have collectively inherited unconscious images, ideas, or thoughts, which he called archetypes. These archetypes reflect common experiences that all humans (and their ancestors) have shared over millions of years of evolution, and the main purpose of these archetypes is to prepare us for these common experiences. Two such archetypes, according to Jung, are heroes and demons. Current research appears to support Jung - scientists have found that newborn babies are equipped with a readiness for language, for numbers, for their parents' faces - and even a preference for people who are moral. Humans appear to be innately prepared for certain people and tasks, and we believe this may include encounters with heroes.

2. Heroes nurture us when we're young - Our research has shown that when people are asked to name their own personal heroes, the first individuals who often come to mind are parents and caretakers. All of us owe whatever success we've had in life to the people who were there for us when we were young, vulnerable, and developing. When we recognize the great sacrifices that these nurturers and caretakers have made for us, we're likely to call them our heroes.

3. Heroes reveal our missing qualities - Heroes educate us about right and wrong. Most fairytales and children's stories serve this didactic purpose, showing kids the kinds of behaviors that are needed to succeed in life, to better society, and to overcome villainy. It is during our youth that we most need good, healthy adult role models who demonstrate exemplary behavior. But adults need heroic models as well. Heroes reveal to us the kinds of qualities we need to be in communion with others.

4. Heroes save us when we're in trouble - This principle explains the powerful appeal of comic book superheroes. People seemingly can't get enough of Batman, Superman, Spiderman, Iron Man, and many others. We are moved by stories of magical beings with superhuman powers who can instantly remove danger and make everything right. This principle also explains our extreme admiration for society's true heroic protectors - law enforcement officers, firefighters, EMTs, paramedics, and military personnel.

5. Heroes pick us up when we're down - Life inevitably hands us personal setbacks and failings. Failed relationships, failed businesses, and health problems are common life experiences for us. Our research has shown that it is during these phases of great personal challenge in our lives that heroes are most likely inspire us to overcome whatever adversity we're facing. Heroes lift us up when we're personally in danger of falling down emotionally, physically, or spiritually.

6. Heroes give us hope - Independent of our own personal well-being, we cannot help but recognize that the world is generally a troubled place rife with warfare, poverty, famine, and unrest. Heroes are beacons of light amidst this vast darkness. Heroes prove to us that no matter how much suffering there is in the world, there are supremely good people around whom we can count on to do the right thing, even when most other people are not. Heroes bring light into a dark world.

7. Heroes validate our preferred moral worldview - One fascinating theory in psychology is called terror management theory, which proposes that people's fear of death strengthens their allegiance to cultural values. Just the simple act of reminding people of their mortality leads them to exaggerate whatever moral tendencies they already have. For example, studies have shown that reminders of death lead people to reward do-gooders and punish bad-doers more than they normally would. Just thinking about the fragility of life can lead us to need and to value heroes.

8. Heroes provide dramatic, entertaining stories - Psychologists have long been aware of the power of a good, juicy narrative. Stories of heroes and heroic myth have entertained humans since the dawn of recorded history. Joseph Campbell documented recurring patterns in these hero stories in his seminal book, and virtually all hero stories feature these time-honored patterns. Today's media are all-too aware of our hunger for hero stories and take great delight in building celebrity heroes up and then tearing them down. People have always been drawn to human drama and they always will be.

9. Heroes solve problems - Our research has shown that people's heroes are not just paragons of morality. They also show superb competencies directed toward the goal of solving society's most vexing problems. Jonas Salk developed the first polio vaccine. George Washington Carver introduced crop rotation into agriculture. Stephanie Kwolek invented the material in bullet-proof vests that have saved the lives of countless law enforcement officers. Heroes give us wisdom and save lives with their brains, not just with their brawn.

10. Heroes deliver justice - People from all cultures possess a strong desire for justice. After members of the Boston police captured the Boston Marathon bomber, crowds of citizens lined the streets to applaud their heroes. Research has shown that we need to believe that we live in a just world where good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people. The preamble to the 1950s Superman television show spoke of superman's never-ending quest for " truth, justice, and the American way ". Heroes quench our thirst for fairness and lawfulness.

- - - - - -

So there you have them - 10 reasons why people need heroes. These reasons tap into basic human needs for survival, nurturance, growth, education, safety, security, healing, happiness, health, hope, wisdom, and justice. None of us can meet these important needs without significant help from others. We certainly hope - and strongly suspect - that as long as humans have these needs, we'll have extraordinary people whom we call heroes willing to step up to help us.

For more information, here are some academic articles we've written about heroes and the psychology of heroism.

- - - - - - -

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Scott T. Allison and George R. Goethals People often ask us why we need heroes. Although the phrase " why we need them" is in the subtitle of our first HEROES book, we've never really offered a succinct list of the many reasons why heroes are so important to us.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Superhero Comics became much more political and dealt with social issues such as the short-lived run of Green Lantern/Green Arrow by Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams and the Captain America story arc of the superhero's political disillusionment by Steve Englehart.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the past few years, even the most ardent comic book nerd might have wondered if there were too many superhero movies playing in the local multiplex. For every Iron Man, or Avengers, there have been a couple of less-than Fantastic Fours and enough dubious Hulks to smash the sternest spirit. Studios keep making these films because they know audiences will flock to see them, even if the heroes include a raccoon and a tree. So the question this poses is: why are we so drawn to superhero stories? And since when?

The answer to the second question is more brief than the first. Superheroes have existed for as long as stories, before writing and across every culture from which we can find evidence. Fionn mac Cumhaill built the Giant's Causeway in Northern Ireland, and Gilgamesh defeated Humbaba in Mesopotamia. Rama was exiled from Ayodhya in India, while Beowulf slew Grendel and Grendel's mother in Scandinavia. And that's before you think about the ancient Greeks, who boasted a plethora of heroes to match any collection from Marvel or DC.

The rules about what makes a superhero are pretty flexible. Superman is an alien, pre-empted by almost two millennia by the Assyrian satirist Lucian who wrote in his True Stories of extra-terrestrial armies engaged in a war. Spider-Man was bitten by a radioactive spider, and Bruce Banner was dosed with gamma rays: in other words, they are ordinary human beings with an extra power imposed upon them. The ancients used a similar narrative device, but with semi-divinity as the explanation, rather than science: Perseus, for example, is a hero because his father is Zeus. Wonder Woman, like Hippolyta and Penthesilea before her, is an Amazon, and so also semi-divine.

Bruce Wayne and Tony Stark's superpowers are their limitless credit cards, which also explains why Agamemnon - least heroic of all heroes, surely - is so concerned about acquiring more booty than other Greek hero during the Trojan War: money is power. But perhaps my favourite subgroup of superheroes includes Hawkeye and Green Arrow, whose superpower is 'being especially good with a bow and arrow'. This ties them neatly to the wiliest of all ancient heroes, Odysseus. After a 20-year absence from his home of Ithaca, he proves his identity to those who thought him long dead by stringing a complex bow and shooting an arrow through twelve axe-heads.

Every superhero has his origin story, and a surprisingly large number of modern ones owe those origins to myths of gods and heroes who existed millennia before their cultural descendants. Even Ant-Man isn't a completely recent phenomenon: Zeus turned himself into an ant, as part of his scheme to have sex with every pretty girl in the ancient world while disguised as an array of different creatures. Leda was ravished by him in swan form; poor Eurymedusa was accosted by him as an ant. Achilles' warriors, the Myrmidons, legendarily owe their name to this union (the Greek word for an ant is myrmex): they too are Ant-men.
Comics and classics
So that brings us back to the first question, which is rather more complicated: what is it about the superhero narrative that has such a primal appeal we've been telling stories about men and women with superpowers for as long as we've told stories? For the ancients, heroes and gods acted as a kind of bridge between what they could understand and explain, and what they could not. For example, ancient Greeks and Romans experienced large numbers of earthquakes; they knew the ground shook, but they could not possibly have guessed the existence of tectonic plates. So they extrapolated: a light, wooden table would shake if you stamped your foot next to it, on a wooden floor. When buildings shook, it made sense then that something very powerful was stamping on the ground somewhere. Thus, Poseidon acquired his honorific title 'Earth-shaker'. The idea of a god lurking beneath the ocean smacking his trident into the seabed may seem like a fanciful explanation to us. But as a way of explaining the information available to the ancients, it's not bad.

And heroes in the Iliad, Odyssey and Aeneid - the epic poems of the Trojan War and its aftermath - often have an intimate connection to the gods that shapes their heroic stories. Achilles is the son of Thetis (a sea-nymph for whom Zeus has an especially soft spot). Aeneas is the son of Venus, and though Odysseus boasts mortal parentage, he is the favourite of Athena (and bête-noire of Poseidon). Odysseus is described by Homer as 'Polumetis', which means 'of many wiles'. But still, some of his best schemes are provided by one god or another: without the help of Hermes, for instance, he would not have the stratagem in place to defeat the witch Circe.

This connection to a higher power which can influence the world around them (whether it is Zeus or SHIELD) is a crucial aspect of many heroes. And perhaps it is this particular characteristic that grants the superhero one of their more troubling tendencies: the excessive individualism which allows them to operate outside the rules of society and beyond or above the rule of law. It's a common trope of modern superhero films: who is Batman to decide what kind of justice Gotham deserves? He's a masked vigilante who sets himself above his fellow citizens and acts as judge, jury and sometimes executioner on the villains who populate the city.
The existential X-Men
This question too is not a modern one. In Book II of The Iliad, a man named Thersites makes a brief cameo appearance. He is not described, as so many characters are, with reference to his father: whoever that is, he's not important enough for a name-check. Thersites is also vulgar and misshapen: we are surely supposed to conclude that he is far from heroic material. More so when he begins to speak, and issues a trenchant critique of the character of Agamemnon, the king who oversees all the Greeks: Theristes accuses him of being greedy and cowardly - sentiments which echo those Achilles has made of Agamemnon earlier in the poem.

Thersites is then beaten by Odysseus and he weeps at the pain and humiliation. But the question is now surely lodged in the audience's mind: why should Agamemnon be treated as a great king, worthy of all the treasure he has claimed for himself. What sets him above us, apart from his monstrous self-regard? Especially when all are agreed that Achilles is the greater warrior, a braver man.

And what happens when a hero turns completely away from the path which most of us would consider good? Magneto, for example, starts out fighting alongside Charles Xavier, before their choices place them on opposing sides. His story echoes that of Ajax, who fights alongside the other Greek heroes during the Trojan War. But after he is tricked out of what he sees to be his rightful reward (which is instead given to Odysseus), he turns on his erstwhile comrades. Only an enchantment from Athena (protecting Odysseus as always) clouds his mind, and convinces him that he is slaughtering Greek warriors when he is actually killing livestock. The humiliation is so terrible that he takes his own life when he realises what he has done.

We are surely drawn to heroes and superheroes because they illuminate the human condition - and they do so precisely because they operate at a slightly inhuman level. Heroes are like us, but more so: stronger, cleverer, faster. They suffer from the same human frailties as we do, but because of their superior powers, these struggles are played out in a more dramatic arena than our own.

Superheroes impose order on a chaotic world, which can often seem to be filled with nefarious powers (from natural disasters to supervillains) that mere mortals cannot identify or hope to fight. We clearly prefer a world of lawless superheroes to one with no superheroics at all. And we always have.

If you would like to comment on this story or anything else you have seen on BBC Culture, head over to our Facebook page or message us on Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Before Marvel and DC: Superheroes of the ancient world

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the past few years, even the most ardent comic book nerd might have wondered if there were too many superhero movies playing in the local multiplex. For every Iron Man, or Avengers, there have been a couple of less-than Fantastic Fours and enough dubious Hulks to smash the sternest spirit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I have friends who insist they don't, picturing newsprint muscle-men in Mardis Gras outfits fighting villains with names like Doctor Atrocity and making little "BLAMMO!" signs when they punch. Those friends, though, inevitably turn out to like James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, or some other fictional hero doing things real people can't do-superheroes in civvies. Every culture has stories like this; our forebears told them around campfires or mead-halls, 20th-century kids read them in comic books.

By the end of the century, moreover, comic books had grown up with their audiences, with series like and winning literature awards competing against regular fiction. Moving to the silver screen, though, proved a delicate business: do it well and you distill decades of character development into a few hours; do it badly and you get a money pit of special effects. To see both of these results in action, you can see this spring's two competing blockbusters, Captain America: Civil War and Superman vs. Batman: Dawn of Justice .

The films have much in common. Each pits two good guys against each other, and even the good guys themselves are similar: a patriotically colored idealist (Superman, Captain America) and a genius playboy billionaire who invents a techno-suit in a cave (Batman, Iron Man). More importantly, both films ask thoughtful questions: if superheroes wield enormous power and answer to no one, how do they represent freedom and democracy? Or should they answer to governments that we don't trust ourselves? Americans, after all, have mixed feelings about regular, non-super-powered police, who don't fire lasers from their eyes.

Such questions have the potential to make a great story in which decent people find themselves on opposite sides of a moral dilemma. None of it works, though, unless the heroes are, on some level, decent people. Both films promised; one delivered.

Superman/Batman failed with critics and audiences. Much has been made of its lava-pit color scheme, incomprehensible plot, misguided casting, and slow-motion action scenes-but what cut fans more deeply was that the heroes did not act heroic. A film in which Batman carries a gun, kills people, and brands criminals' flesh with a hot iron is a film that invents a different character and puts him in a Batman costume.

Superman receives even greater disservice. Let's be blunt: there has never been an interesting story about Superman. Any interesting story is about Clark Kent. Clark Kent has the power to leave his desk, punish his bullies, and reveal himself at any moment-and every day he must refuse to turn the stones around him to bread. He must endure casual disrespect from the woman he loves, knowing secretly that he is the man she loves. That makes for an interesting and sympathetic character in a way that a man in underwear throwing giant things does not. Here, though, the one relatable aspect of the character is removed.

Most dispiriting, though, are scenes with Superman's parents, in which his father (dead, in a dream) implies that there's no point in helping people and his mother (alive) tells him that "you don't owe this world a thing." If this guy doesn't feel obligated to help anyone, in what way is he Superman? Comic books already have costumed, super-powered characters who feel unconstrained by civic responsibility-they are called villains.

If you want to know how to handle the same premise well, however, you can look to Captain America . Marvel does superhero films right: witty without being silly, dramatic without being dour, and never forgetting to have fun. Its movies feature Shakespearean actors and comedians rather than movie stars, people who can take absurd comic-book premises and imbue them with the proper gravitas or cheerful humor.

Most importantly, Marvel spent years slowly developing its characters over the course of a dozen or so films, making this film feel like the next logical step in their journey. The mercurial Tony Stark, who started as an irresponsible hedonist, is now haunted by his near-death and having caused the deaths of innocent people. Desperate to assuage his guilt, the former rogue commits himself to following the orders of a higher power, even if it means turning on his colleagues. Captain America's character arc has taken him on the opposite track; the quintessential patriot has seen his trust in authority betrayed again and again in previous films, until he trusts no one but his conscience.

Other characters rally behind the two leaders, each on their own journey. Most don't get more than a few lines or camera shots, but we often don't need a lot more. Spider-Man makes a brief appearance here, and the film gives him more character in his few minutes than Superman gets in a 150-minute film. Refreshingly, he looks and acts like a real teenager, unlike the 35-year-old underwear models who usually play teens in American films, and the filmmakers had the intelligence to skip the origin story. He's Spider-Man; we know who he is.

Like a Greek tragedy it sets up a conflict between loyalties, in which good people betray one oath to keep another and live with the consequences. Within the confines of a fun summer action movie, it shows its heroes as people-flawed, stubborn, and conflicted, yet essentially good-hearted, taking responsibility for their actions and striving to become better. This kind of story is what superheroes were for in the first place.

Again, all human cultures have had superhero tales, from Gilgamesh and Odysseus to Robin Hood and Zorro. When cultures are at their peak, they write about the heroic ideals to which they strive, as Sophocles did of Ajax or as Vergil did of Aeneas. During the Depression and World War II, the U.S.'s peak of power and conflict, it began creating superheroes, an image of what we would like to be.

When cultures abandon that heroic ideal, when they acquire the "philosophic indifference" of Gibbon's latter-day Romans, the culture is in deep trouble. As our country slipped away from the post-war glow into an era of escalating hedonism, it abandoned superheroes save as pablum for children. Yet Generation X-ers and Millennials, children of the counterculture, embraced them even into adulthood, perhaps desperate for the heroes their culture no longer provided. In this century, as the nation grows ever more troubled, we are turning back to stories that give us heroes to believe in-a sign that there is hope for us.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I have friends who insist they don't, picturing newsprint muscle-men in Mardis Gras outfits fighting villains with names like Doctor Atrocity and making little "BLAMMO!" signs when they punch. Those friends, though, inevitably turn out to like James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, or some other fictional hero doing things real people can't do-superheroes in civvies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The most recognizable comics characters in the world

Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, the Hulk, and countless other comic book superheroes have been in the media for decades. Since their debut in 1938, superheroes have dealt with deep personal, social, and political issues. From drug and alcohol abuse to the horrific events during September 11, 2001, they have brought us a feeling of hope, creativity, and wonder. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked) As the time changes, our heroes manage to stay with it, overcoming the many challenges along the way. The story of the American superhero has been a long, uphill struggle, yet they always seem to be relevant with the ever-changing times. They still remain a constant impact on the people and the nation.

The 1930's was a tragic decade. America had entered the Great Depression, which was filled with poverty and the lack of hope. People did many things to try to escape this terrible reality by either watching movies, attending sporting events, and listening to the radio. At this time, the newspaper was also very valuable. They had all the latest news, interviews, games, and even comic strips. (Once Upon a Time the Super Heroes)

Standard comic strip panel (1930's)

Comic strips are a sequence of drawings, relating comic incidents that typically have dialogue printed in balloons. The first comic strips had stories about cute animals or funny cartoon characters and were largely accepted as a form of entertainment for children. Old comic strips were collected in magazines called comic books. National Allied Publications was one of the first comic book publishers in the industry. Founded in 1934, one of their most popular titles was Detective Comics. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked)

Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster were two young Jewish immigrants who lived in New York City. They were fascinated with science fiction, mythology, and art. They were very passionate about comic books and read them on a daily basis. Tired of dreaming of creating their own character, they finally did so in 1933. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked) Siegel was the writer and Shuster provided the illustrations. Their character was a hero, who, when he was an infant, was sent in a space ship from the doomed planet Krypton, which crashed down to Earth. The infant was found by a kindly couple from Kansas, and was raised to believe in truth and justice. Being from another planet, he had many unique abilities including super speed, strength, and invulnerability. He donned a blue outfit with a shield on his chest marked with an "S" and a bright red cape. They called him "Superman."

Superman was turned down by every newspaper in the area; the very idea that a man who can lift cars and was "faster than a speeding bullet" was utterly ridiculous. After five long years of rejection, DC Comics (formerly National Allied Publications) took Siegel and Shuster's creation and put him on the cover of the comic book, Action Comics #1. It sold out every copy. From that day forward, Superman has become a national icon and kicked off what historians would later refer to as "The Golden Age of Comic Books." (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked)

Superman was everywhere. By 1940 he had radio shows, cartoons, dolls, action figures, and even a balloon in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. What made Superman unique and relatable was that he was a fictional character who lived in the same world as his readers. He was an immigrant who came to this new world and strived for the American dream. He was especially looked up to by young boys and teenagers. With Superman's huge success, DC wanted a new hero to follow him. They hired Bob Kane to come up with the story and Bill Finger to provide the artwork. (Once Upon a Time the Super Heroes)

Kane and Finger's new hero was "The Bat-Man" who made his historical debut in the pages of Detective Comics #27, 1939. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked) The Bat-Man was a hero who, unlike Superman, possessed no powers, but had many gadgets including a grapple gun, a utility belt, and shuriken-like weapons called "batarangs." His origin was much darker than Superman's: billionaire Bruce Wayne witnessed his parents get murdered when he was just eight-years-old. Wanting to avenge their deaths, he mastered every form of martial arts and donned a black cowl, a mask in the shape of a bat, and chose to fight crime at night on the streets of Gotham City. (Batman) The Bat-Man (later changed to Batman) made just about the same cultural impact as Superman did previously.

With DC's Superman and Batman came other companies and their superheroes. Fawcett Comics had Bulletman, newspapers had The Spirit, and Timely Comics debuted in 1939 with heroes named the "Human Torch" and "Namor the Submariner." Psychiatrist and co-creator of the lie detector, William Moulton Marston criticized DC for "not being all it could be." DC later hired him and he went on to create Wonder Woman in 1941, the first female superhero. Wanting to appeal to younger readers, DC gave Batman a kid sidekick named Robin. Soon enough, many of the other heroes obtained young sidekicks: Bulletman had Bulletgirl, Human Torch had Toro, etc. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked) Fawcett Comics created a superhero who actually was a child. When young Billy Batson yelled the word "SHAZAM!" he'd be transformed into the super-powered hero "Captain Marvel." Eventually, Captain Marvel started to outsell Superman himself. DC pinned a lawsuit against Fawcett, claiming Captain Marvel was "too similar" to Superman. Finally, after a twelve year legal battle, DC won the lawsuit and Fawcett agreed to stop printing Captain Marvel. (Once Upon a Time the Super Heroes)

In the early 1940's, the hot topic was undoubtedly World War II. The nation needed heroes to help fight the war in Europe, and these superheroes fought there, even before the American soldiers entered the war. Timely Comics was the first to enter the subject when their character Namor fought the Japanese in 1940. Soon Batman, Robin, Wonder Woman, Human Torch, and many other heroes started to fight the Axis Powers. DC wrote a story where Superman literally ended the war in two pages, but since they felt that such things could not turn out that easy in real life, they had Superman fight the war on the home front, selling war bonds, instead. (Once Upon a Time the Super Heroes)

All the superheroes were fighting for the American flag, but it was not until 1941 when a superhero actually wore it to "fight the good fight." There were many evil people out there, but Adolf Hitler was a monster compared to the rest. On the cover of Captain America #1, 1941, the star-spangled avenger gave Hitler a left hook on the jaw. The people loved this new hero, so much so, that he was the inspiration for many young men who signed up for war during World War II. His origin was very straight-forward: young Steve Rogers was a frail, sickly patriot who wanted nothing more than to serve his country. Turned down because of his physique, he entered top-secret project, Operation: Rebirth, and was given a shot of the "Super Soldier Serum." He transformed into a perfect human specimen. They called him Captain America, and he and his sidekick Bucky went on to fight the evil Nazis for the good of the United States of America and the rest of the Allies. (Captain America)

After the Allies' victory of World War II, superheroes began to go obsolete. With no more villains to fight, many of the heroes died out. Comic books were taken over by new topics featuring westerns, romances, and horror stories. The only superheroes that were still selling were DC's Superman, Batman and Robin, and Wonder Woman. (Once Upon a Time the Super Heroes)

In 1954, Dr. Frederick Wertham wrote a book entitled " Seduction of the Innocent" that blamed comic books for corrupting child youth. In it, he made major accusations aimed at Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. He said Superman was a fascist that liked to see people in pain while he himself remained immune, and Wonder Woman was the exact opposite of what ladies are supposed to act like. The wildest accusation, however, was that Batman and Robin were leading a homosexual fantasy and "make boys gay." " Seduction of the Innocent " almost single-handedly destroyed the comic book industry. In order to cope with people like Dr. Wertham and the many other angry parents, the "Comics Code Authority" was created. The Comics Code made it so comic books had to be approved before they were published. It censored comic books to the point where they could not feature any stories that featured horror, drugs, romance, blood, etc. Superman now worked close to the law, more like a policeman. Batman and Robin spent more time with new female characters. Wonder Woman spent more time with her love interest, Steve Trevor. While saving the industry, the Comics Code also hurt it. Sales plummeted by more than fifty percent after the industry's short-lived spike. (Once Upon a Time the Super Heroes)

Trying to get comics back on track, DC had the idea to take their older heroes from the 1940's and revamp them to more modernized versions. In Showcase Comics #4, 1956, they reintroduced "The Flash." This Flash was much different than his 1940's counterpart because he wore a sleeker costume, was younger, and when he was not fighting crime, worked for the police as a forensics scientist. With Flash's newfound success, DC revamped more heroes like Green Lantern, Hawkman, Atom, and Aquaman. These new heroes, joined by Wonder Woman, and later Superman and Batman, formed the Justice League of America. Timely Comics wanted to get back in the superhero comic-selling game, so they had writer Stan Lee and artist Jack Kirby come up with a team Timely could call their own. In 1961, Timely Comics changed their name to Marvel, and released Fantastic Four #1. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked.)

To say Stan Lee and Jack Kirby's partnership was incredible is an understatement. Together they created superheroes like Iron Man, Thor, the Hulk, Daredevil, and Black Panther (the first black superhero). They also created superhero teams such as the X-Men and the Avengers. They had revived their older heroes such as Namor the Submariner and Captain America (in the pages of Fantastic Four and The Avengers, respectively) to join this new "Silver Age of Comic Books." (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked)

Stan Lee hated the idea of sidekicks. He believed that if a young person wanted to fight crime, they would do it by themselves. He designed a hero that actually was a teenager to fight crime, but his publisher turned the hero down. (McLaughlin) Lee kept pushing and his hero finally made his debut in the last issue of the failing comic book series Amazing Fantasy. In the pages of Amazing Fantasy #15, 1962, The Amazing Spider-Man was born. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked) Peter Parker is a high school student that, after being bitten by a radioactive spider, gained abilities to help him fight crime. After the death of his Uncle Ben, Spider-Man learned that "With great power, comes great responsibility."

Spider-Man was a cultural phenomenon. Not only was he an awe-inspiring hero, but he was unique in the fact that he had every day problems, much like his very own readers. During the 1960's Marvel even outsold the likes of DC. DC characters, however, were certainly not overlooked. In 1966, a television program, Batman, starring Adam West and Burt Ward, made its debut and "Bat-Mania" swept the nation. ( IMDb) This campy television series was a parody more than anything else, but the readers and audiences alike did not care, as Batman comic sales nearly tripled because of the two-year-long series. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked)

DC's characters and Marvel's characters were very different from each other. DC heroes were more parental. Superman and Wonder Woman were characters that readers aspired to be, while Marvel heroes, on the other hand, related to their readers and touched more on current events. Spider-Man and Hulk were characters who people already were, minus their super powers, of course. The way both companies wrote their comics was also different. DC would write out their scripts first, so the artist could draw around it, while Marvel would have the artist draw the pages first, then the writers would fill in the script around it. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked)

Throughout the 1970's readers started to connect to Marvel's book, X-Men. The X-Men were teenagers who, during puberty, develop "mutant powers." Lead by Professor Charles Xavier, the X-Men would fight for a world that feared and hated them for being different. The X-Men were a metaphor for just about any minority, whether it was racial, religious, etc. Marvel Comics had such an impact on younger readers that Stan Lee was asked by the Office of Health Education to write an anti-drug story, featuring one of Marvel's characters. In Amazing Spider-Man #96, 1971, the issue was addressed, but because of the Comics Code Authority, Lee was not allowed to publish it. Finally, with the help of Lee's publisher, Martin Goodman, he was able to publish the story without the Code's approval. After this issue hit the stands and sold out, other companies took the hint, and started tackling other issues without the Code's consent. (Once Upon a Time the Super Heroes)

A few months later, in DC's Green Lantern/Green Arrow #85, 1971, they went over the effects of heroine abuse. With all these comics touching on all these issues, the Comics Code Authority became obsolete, and was finally lifted. Publishers were now free to write any story they wanted to. In 1978, Warner Brothers and DC Entertainment made Superman: The Movie, the first big-budget film to feature a superhero. (IMDb) Superman became actor Christopher Reeve's legacy.

Finally free of the Comics Code Authority, Marvel and DC touched on countless new issues during the 1980's. Iron Man was revealed to be an alcoholic. Child abuse was revealed to be the reason behind Hulk's rage. Finally, Superman villain, Lex Luthor, went from being a mad scientist to a corrupted businessman. DC hired ex- Daredevil writer Frank Miller to reinvent Batman to be as dark and gritty as he was in the 1930's. Miller's The Dark Knight Returns was the comic that made Batman a force to be reckoned with again. Alan Moore wrote the critically acclaimed Watchmen, which featured everything from murder to sexual impotence. DC's Sandman #19, 1990, was the first comic to win a World Fantasy Award. (Once Upon a Time the Super Heroes) Comic books now have their own specialty shops and longer comic books were even referred to as "graphic novels." With the newfound success of Frank Miller's Batman, Warner Brothers released a new Batman film directed by Tim Burton in 1989. (IMDb)

During the 1990's older comic books became extremely valuable. People, thinking that new issues would be just as valuable one day, started buying more and more of them. The more people buy, the more comics publishers kept printing. The main reason older issues were so valuable was because they were so scarce. (Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked) Collectors realized this eventually, and they were not buying as much as they used to. New storylines were written specifically to bring old readers back in; including Superman's wedding to Lois Lane, making Lex Luthor president of the United States, and the famous Death of Superman story-arc. Also, superhero creators can now own the rights to the characters they make, which was very good news to people such as ex-Marvel Editor-in-Chief, Todd MacFarlane, creator of the very famous characters Venom and Spawn. Unfortunately, in the late 1990's comic book popularity was starting to slip again.

In this newer generation, comic book films are becoming more popular and successful. 2000's X-Men was the first superhero movie to truly benefit from today's special effects. (Comic Books Unbound) Sam Raimi's Spider-Man film was the highest grossing superhero film for five years with a worldwide gross of $821.71 million until it was out grossed by its sequel, Spider-Man 3. (IMDb) Christopher Nolan's Batman film, The Dark Knight, currently holds that record and is the eleventh highest grossing film of all time with a worldwide gross of $1,001,921,825. (Box Office Mojo) It also got a nomination for Best Picture of 2008 and Heath Ledger won the Academy Award for Best Actor in a Supporting Role for his portrayal as the Joker, Batman's greatest enemy. While the comic books aren't selling as high as they used to, the superheroes are still household names because of these films. As a direct result to the movies doing so well, DC re-launched their entire business and franchises with "The New 52" in 2011, keeping their characters current and up-to-date for newer readers.

With the times constantly shifting, superheroes have almost always stayed true to their roots. Even though the heroes may change slightly with the time, they are still with the public and their critical reception remains unchanged. After almost a century, Superman is still the alien from Krypton who fights for truth and justice. Batman is still the billionaire playboy by day, who avenges his parents' deaths on the streets of Gotham City by night. Spider-Man is still a science nerd who was bitten by a radioactive spider and has trouble getting the girl. Superheroes are not going anywhere and even one-hundred years from now, people will still read comic books, watching TV and movies, or reading digital comics via iPads or Android tablets to find out what Superman is up to. Superheroes have stood the tests of time. They are here to stay for many generations to come!

Sources

"All Time Worldwide Box Office Grosses." Box Office Mojo. 4 Apr. 2012. Web. 14 Mar. 2012.

"Batman." DC Comics. n.d. Web. 4 Apr. 2012.

"Captain America." Marvel Universe: The Definitive Online Source for Marvel Super Hero Bio. n.d. Web. 4 Apr. 2012.

Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked. Dir. Steve Kroopnick. Triage Entertainment, 2003. Online Documentary.

International Movie Database. IMDb. n.d. Web. 4 Apr. 2012.

McLaughlin, Jeff. "Stan Lee." Pop Culture Universe: Icons, Idols, Ideas. ABC-CLIO, 2012. Web. 4 Apr. 2012.

Once Upon a Time the Super Heroes. Dir. Michel Viotte. InnoForm Media, 2001. Online Documentary

"Spider-Man." Marvel Universe: The Definitive Online Source for Marvel Super Hero Bios. n.d. Web. 4 Apr. 2012.

Starz Inside: Comic Books Unbound. Dir. Ed Garcia. Foglight Entertainment, 2008. Online Documentary.

"Superman." DC Comics. n.d. Web. 4 Apr. 2012.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, the Hulk, and countless other comic book superheroes have been in the media for decades. Since their debut in 1938, superheroes have dealt with deep personal, social, and political issues. From drug and alcohol abuse to the horrific events during September 11, 2001, they have brought us a feeling of hope, creativity, and wonder.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The latest film in the X-Men franchise, 'Days of Future Past,' opened in cinemas around the world this past weekend.

Box office takings have already hit $350m (£209m), far exceeding the production budget of $200m.

It is likely the studio's profits will eventually run to hundreds of millions of dollars.

This level of success is fairly typical. In fact, when you look at the box office take of superhero movies in the U.S. on their opening weekend, the latest X-Men film does not even make it into the top 10.

Superhero films have always been popular with cinema-goers since Christopher Reeve first played Superman in 1978. Three sequels were to follow over the next decade.

In the 1990s, it was Batman's turn with Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer and George Clooney playing the Caped Crusader in four films.

However, since the turn of the new millennium, there has been an explosion in the number of films.

According to Box Office Mojo, there have been 61 movie releases in the superhero genre since the first X-Men film back in 2000. On average, there are a half dozen new films each year.

Box office mojo

So why are there so many superhero films? Well, the simple answer is that they sell cinema tickets.

To date, there are four films that have grossed more than $1 billion at the global box office - The Avengers ($1.5bn), Iron Man 3 ($1.2bn), The Dark Knight Rises ($1.1bn) and The Dark Knight ($1bn).

If box office receipts are adjusted to reflect cinema ticket prices in 2013, then the main superhero franchises have made close to $25bn thus far.

Even when the films do poorly, they are rarely disastrous. The 2004 film Catwoman starring Halle Berry was panned by critics.

Despite this, the box office take was only $12m less than the $100m production budget.

Others include Green Lantern in 2011 and Elektra in 2005. However, when you compare box office takings with production budgets, both films actually made a small profit.

The main reason for the surge in box office receipts is the popularity of the superhero genre around the world.

It used to be the case that the US box office was the be all and end all for commercial success. But, for recent superhero movies, the US typically accounts for no more than $4 out of every $10 made.

For example, this year Captain America (The Winter Soldier) and The Amazing Spiderman 2 were big hits in China's massive box office.

This means that films which would just about break even on the basis of US receipts can become successful when earnings from around the world are added up.

DC Comics versus Marvel

Before superheroes were movie stars, they were primarily comic book characters with most falling into one of two stables.

DC Comics, now part of Warner Brothers, has relied on its two main stars Superman and Batman for box office success.

After the not stellar Superman 4 in 1987, the franchise was brought back 20 years later in the 2006 film Superman Returns and last year's Man of Steel.

Both did well, but it was Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, staring Christian Bale as Batman, that has proved to be by far the most lucrative.

Other forays into the superhero genre, including Green Lantern, Catwoman, and Jonah Hex have not worked out quite so well.

It is probably not surprising that the next planned release will be a joint Batman and Superman film.

Marvel, on the other hand, has a superhero squad that includes Spiderman, Hulk, Fantastic Four, X-men, Avengers, Thor, Captain America and Iron Man among its stars.

It has largely fuelled the boom in superhero films.

Since 2000, there have been five Spiderman films with two more in the pipeline, seven X-men films with three more planned, three Iron Man films, two Fantastic Four films with two more planned, two Captain America films with one more in production, one Thor, and one Avengers with another to be released later this year.

Its cast of arguably lesser known stars has grossed more than twice the combined receipts of the Batman and Superman franchises.

The $4bn paid by Disney to acquire Marvel Entertainment in 2009 now looks like a bargain, even though Spiderman is currently licensed to Sony Pictures and X-Men to Fox.

Why are superheroes so popular?

So why has there been a surge in the popularity of superhero movie films?

Advances in technology have certainly helped. The older movies struggled to recreate the comic book strip on the big screen in a realistic way. The superheroes didn't quite look the part either, as they were mostly grown men in spandex costumes.

These problems have been solved by modern day CGI.

Success of course breeds success. Production budgets are continuously upped which not only allows for more CGI, but also brings in the bigger name actors, directors and producers into the genre.

Where superhero movies have been particularly successful is in their wide audience appeal. Most are rated PG-13 so have large viewership.

Many adults are drawn in by their memories of the comic books, but the films are still very popular with those that didn't.

The superhero bubble does not look like bursting soon. And with more films in the pipeline, Spiderman, Captain America, the X-Men, the Avengers, the Fantastic Four, Batman and Superman will be busy for at least the next couple of years saving the world time and again.

For more on the business of movie franchises, catch Talking Business with Linda Yueh.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Superheroes and the billion dollar global box office

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The latest film in the X-Men franchise, 'Days of Future Past,' opened in cinemas around the world this past weekend. Box office takings have already hit $350m (£209m), far exceeding the production budget of $200m. It is likely the studio's profits will eventually run to hundreds of millions of dollars.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Marvel Comics revolutionised the superhero genre in the 1960s with comic book characters such as Spider-Man, Thor, Iron Man and the Hulk. Colourfully costumed adventurers who fought criminals and alien monsters primarily on the streets of New York City, and who, despite their incredible superpowers, struggled with personal and social problems. Stan Lee, the architect of the Marvel universe, routinely addressed readers as "true believers".

Almost 60 years later the same Marvel characters are making true believers of us all. The success of Marvel feature films over the last decade has moved superheroes from just an obsession of comic book fanboys to an international phenomenon. The superhero blockbuster trend shows no signs of slowing down, with upcoming releases of Thor: The Dark World, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, X-Men: Days of Future Past and dozens of other planned films, including the much-anticipated sequel to Avengers Assemble, and new television series such as Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Superheroes are everywhere, from shirts to toys to exhibitions like the Marvel Super Heroes 4D experience at Madame Tussauds.

The current dominance of superhero films at the box office can be attributed to a number of factors. The usual plot of an otherwise ordinary human gaining fantastic powers so that he (unfortunately rarely a "she") can vanquish his enemies and be adored by the masses will always be an appealing fantasy. Likewise, the metaphorical saving of major cities, be they New York, Metropolis or Gotham, is a comforting tale in a post-9/11 world. But the main reason that superhero films have become so popular in this millennium is because they can make us believe in the hero and in the spectacular action. Thanks to incredible advances in special effects, especially seamless incorporation of CGI images, live action superheroes finally look believable.

Successful superhero films used to be few and far between. The 1978 Superman and the 1989 Batman were undeniable blockbusters, but countless other attempts to bring superheroes to the big and small screen were embarrassing. Dolph Lundgren as the Punisher in a black T-shirt, Rex Smith as Daredevil in a black bodystocking and Reb Brown as Captain America in shiny spandex and a winged motorcycle helmet have been all but forgotten for a reason: they looked ridiculous.

The memorable tag line for Superman in 1978 was: "You will believe a man can fly." And while that film did offer a relatively good depiction of a live superhero, we never really believed he could fly. Viewers really had to suspend their disbelief for scenes of Superman flying among the skyscrapers with an adoring Lois Lane in his arms. Audiences may have been more forgiving of characters from the pages of DC Comics such as Superman and Batman because at least the films were a step up from the televised adventures of Superman in the 1950s embodied by George Reeves, and the campy 1960s take on Batman featuring Adam West. For the most part, live action superheroes looked like what they were: grown men playing dress-up in unflattering tights.

Seeing real people in unitards battling buffoonish supervillains robbed the genre of all the magic and fantasy that could be depicted on an illustrated page. In the comics, particularly those produced by Marvel, there was no limit to the type of stories that could be told. Giant, purple clad, planet-devouring monsters like Galactus could do battle with the Fantastic Four in the streets, or alien armies of Krees and Skrulls could be defeated by The Avengers. In comic books the only limitation was the artist's imagination. Film and television just could not compete with the fictional mise en scène of the comics.

But all that began to change in the dawn of the 21st century when The X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002) franchises appeared as big-budget special effects masterpieces. Suddenly we believed not only that a human could fly, but that they could also shoot lasers out of their eyes, control the weather, pop "adamantium" claws out of their forearms, cling to walls and swing on spider webs through crowded streets.

Superb costuming, accomplished actors, and skilled directors such as Bryan Singer and Sam Raimi all played a part in finally elevating the genre of live-action superhero films from silly to exciting. But the biggest and most significant change was the believable CGI rendering of superpowers and super action. Hundreds of visual artists spent thousands of hours at their computers to create scenes that were realistic. Audiences were not confronted with the absurdity of a guy in a too-tight Spider-Man costume pretending to climb a wall. The action was realistic despite being pure fantasy.

The CGI rendering of Spider-Man swinging across rooftops was seamlessly interwoven with real actors and real cityscapes to the point that viewers would forget that during crucial scenes we were watching a computer-generated illusion rather than a real person. Film technology had reached a point where it could do what comic books had always been able to do, namely present a superhero story that is enhanced by fantastic images. Special effects had finally stopped being a distraction and started being an attraction.

There is a distinct cinematic pleasure in seeing bodies take flight, casting off the burdens of gravity, as when Tony Stark puts on the Iron Man suit and dashes off to fight bad guys. Or when Steve Rogers (Captain America) emerges from a body-changing experiment and immediately leaps through the city after a Nazi. Or when Thor soars into battle with his hammer at the ready. We can become immersed in the fantasy because it looks realistic, it looks believable and remarkable at the same time. As special effects showcases, superhero movies crystallise our childlike desire for cinema to be larger than life, to be spectacular.

Ask people of a certain age what they remember most about movies as a kid and they will tell you about the thrill of seeing a gargantuan star destroyer scroll across the screen at the beginning of Star Wars (1977); those a generation younger will fondly remember the first glimpse of the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park (1993). Children going to movies now will probably cherish the time they first saw Thor and the Hulk battling each other in The Avengers, or the newest Spider-Man fighting a giant lizard in The Amazing Spider-Man (2012). Superhero movies are no longer just childish, but they do offer childlike thrills to young and old alike.

Superhero movies can now show us things in motion that we could only have dreamed of before. No matter how dynamic a comic book is, it is still a static image that we have to imagine into action. In many ways the current crop of superhero films hark back to the earliest days of movie-making. The dawn of film is a period characterised by historians as "The Cinema of Attractions". The technology of motion pictures was so new and novel that people would pay to see almost anything because it was pure spectacle.

Galloping horses, men sneezing, trains pulling into stations, even an elephant being electrified were filmic spectacles, in the purest sense of the word, because they were something remarkable to see captured on film. Today's superhero movies may have more overwrought plots about good versus evil, but they appeal to our basic desire to see something spectacular. The believability of the characters and the action only makes the adventures all that more spectacular. If global box-office records and merchandising sales are any indication, the Marvel film universe has replicated what those comics did in the 1960s and made true believers of us all.
Jeffrey A Brown is associate professor at the department of popular culture, Bowling Green State University, Ohio

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Marvel's superheroes found the magic to make us all true believers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Marvel Comics revolutionised the superhero genre in the 1960s with comic book characters such as Spider-Man, Thor, Iron Man and the Hulk. Colourfully costumed adventurers who fought criminals and alien monsters primarily on the streets of New York City, and who, despite their incredible superpowers, struggled with personal and social problems. Stan Lee, the architect of the Marvel universe, routinely addressed readers as "true believers".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With this week's Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice and TV's Daredevil, Arrow, Supergirl, Gotham, and The Flash, superheroes are everywhere. But why are they so popular now, and will this pop cultural domination last?

HEROES R US

Cinematically, it is the age of the superhero. The against-the-grain and idiosyncratic Deadpool has been a surprise smash; Marvel Studios' Avengers: Age Of Ultron executed a box office raid of stunning enormity; the trailer for Captain America: Civil War was one of the most downloaded ever; the mutants are back in the upcoming X-Men: Apocalypse; and DC's just-about-to-release Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice (with Suicide Squad to follow soon) has the potential to be one of the biggest superhero flicks yet. And it's not just on the big screen either. On TV, The Marvel Cinematic Universe has been expanded into the company's small screen series, Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D, Agent Carter, Daredevil, Jessica Jones, and the upcoming Iron Fist, Luke Cage, and The Defenders. DC's properties are being equally well served, with Arrow, The Flash, Gotham, Supergirl, and Legends Of Tomorrow. These movies and TV series are hugely popular, and their appeal is bleeding out exponentially from the rusted-on fan-boys-and-girls and young kids that have always been the obvious demographic. Superheroes have always been an essential thread in the rich pop cultural tapestry, but now they're forming an even bigger part of the picture. Off the fringes, and into the mainstream, the superhero is front and centre, and the reasons behind this current campaign of pop cultural hegemony are just as multifold as the number of caped-and-cowled crusaders on our movie and TV screens.

TROUBLED TIMES DEMAND HEROES

"It's a very delicate time right now on Earth, and there's a lot going on that is pretty frightening," Michael Shannon - who played the villainous General Zod in Zack Snyder's Man Of Steel - told FilmInk just prior to the film's release. "It would be nice to believe or think that there was somebody that could protect us from that. Man Of Steel is a very relevant movie." Whether it's random terrorist attacks, over-population, rising crime rates, the threat of financial collapse, the mental hangover of the Global Financial Crisis, prejudice, ignorance, infectious killer viruses, or just traffic congestion, our world is on a constant knife edge. And in troubled times, people enjoy escapism, and perhaps secretly wish that there were superheroes around to hose down all of the horrors of the world. "Good economic times usually signal the death of superheroes, and bad economic times see a surge in their popularity," Mark Millar - an acclaimed comic book writer who has worked on a number of titles at Marvel, and was signed by movie studio, Twentieth Century Fox, to oversee and function as a consultant on all of their comic book properties, which include X-Men and the disastrous Fantastic Four - told FilmInk in 2013. "Superheroes were huge in the thirties during The Great Depression. The worldwide recession will probably last until the end of the decade. You've gotta entertain everyone through it!"

FILMMAKERS = FAN-BOYS

"It actually started with Uncle Scrooge, The Beagle Boys, and Disney comics," Guardians Of The Galaxy director, James Gunn, told FilmInk in 2014. "I really liked those. Every time that I went to the grocery store with my mother, she would buy me one. I then started getting into Spider-Man and Thor and Captain America. I remember one called Scamp, which was Lady & The Tramp's puppy. That was my favourite comic. I learned to read by memorising that comic book. I would just read it over and over again. My mother believed that I could read at the age of three, but I was actually just memorising the comic book that she had read to me." By mere dint of their age, the right people are now making superhero movies. Like James Gunn, many of the filmmakers who have worked, or are currently working, in the genre - like Zack Snyder; Marvel's president of production, Kevin Feige; Avengers: Age Of Ultron director (and now much publicised Marvel Studios drop-out), Joss Whedon, and more - are unashamed comic book nuts, and grew up obsessed with superhero stories. They know and understand superhero folklore and mythology, and believe that maintaining a semblance of connection to the source material is vital to a superhero movie's success.

Superhero movies are now being conceived with intelligence and sensitivity. "I don't know if you realise how hard it must have been to make X-Men," legendary Marvel Comics writer, Stan Lee, told FilmInk in 2004. "Here are a few characters, each one with a super power, and they're all so much bigger than life. How do you get an adult audience to accept this? And yet the director, Bryan Singer - I'm a big fan of his, as I am of Sam Raimi, who did Spider-Man - did it in such a way that even people who weren't comic book fans were able to enjoy the movie. He made it intelligent, and it could have been silly in the wrong hands. I was very impressed."

Gone are the days of low rent production companies like the infamous Cannon Films buying up the rights to superhero characters on the cheap. Not aware of the rich history of Spider-Man - which they bought off Marvel - the company had ridiculously envisioned the character as a half-man, half-tarantula mutant more akin to something out of David Cronenberg's The Fly. Meanwhile, the idiotic script changes that producer, Jon Peters, asked of screenwriter, director, and fan-boy extraordinaire, Kevin Smith ( Clerks, Mallrats), during the pre-production of a failed Superman movie in the nineties are now legendary. "I don't want to see him in that suit...it's too faggy," Peters allegedly told Smith. "There'll be no flying, and he has to fight a giant spider in the third act." Peters also thought that Sean Penn would be perfect to play Superman because he had the eyes of "a caged animal, a fucking killer!" Mmmm, right...

Superhero movies used to be made - or were attempted to be made - by people who had little to no idea of what they were working with. Yes, there were flukes. 1979's Superman: The Movie was a much loved smash despite being principally scripted by Mario Puzo ( The Godfather), who has never been described as a comic book geek, and Tim Burton's 1989 hit, Batman, rode high on the dark vision of its director and the marketing might of Warner Bros. Today's superhero movies are being made by talented, committed directors who are connected to the material. "Great screenwriters and great directors," Mark Millar told FilmInk when asked to offer an opinion on why superhero-themed films have been so popular of late. "It cannot be underestimated. It's something that comic book movies have actually been very lucky with. Having people like Christopher Nolan [the Batman movies], Sam Raimi, and Bryan Singer doing comic book movies has been great. Up until 2000, you could count on one hand the number of good directors doing comic book movies. And since 2000, it's been incredible. It really is the upper A list, and you can never underestimate that. It's shown in the films."

These directors also know that there's a lot more to superhero movies than explosions and action set pieces. "I really enjoy character," Guardians Of The Galaxy director, James Gunn, told FilmInk in 2014. "I love directing big action sequences and putting those together. I love the mechanics and the puzzles of that. But there needs to be character and emotion. That's the stuff that I really care about the most in a movie. And if the other stuff works, it's because I care so much about that part. That's what I bring more of, and that's why they hired me." The fact that comic book publishing house, Marvel, reinvented itself as a movie studio - and subscribes to the same story-and-character-first ethos as someone like James Gunn - is also a huge part of today's superhero movie success, with the company getting all the details right.

And despite the fact that these superhero movies are all being produced by competing studios, their success actually helps - rather than hinders - each other. If all of the superhero movies are good, then ironically, everybody wins, and more of them get made. "I'm always rooting for DC and Warner Bros," Marvel boss, Kevin Feige, told FilmInk, "because not everybody makes the distinction between a Marvel and a DC movie. I hope that people are now starting to see that Marvel Studios logo, and that they know what cinematic universe they're in and what we're doing. But frankly, I get asked all the time, 'Aquaman? Who's that?' So I root for all of them, because if they're all good, people keep staying interested."

ROLLING THE DICE

Another big part of Marvel's success is their willingness to take risks, despite what their box office surety might suggest. If the company was just chasing the dollar, they could much more easily churn out more movies featuring Iron Man. Instead, they're constantly looking through their extensive catalogue for properties that offer variation and a point of difference. "We started talking about Guardians Of The Galaxy as a movie six years ago," the film's producer, Jeremy Latcham, told FilmInk. "At the time, Marvel had this one plan, which was to connect all the films that we were making. It was a crazy experiment in cinema, but it worked. But now we needed another plan, and to do something different, and Guardians Of The Galaxy was on the top of that list. We went ahead with this project because it's so different, and it's so out there." It's also what pushed Marvel to team up with streaming service, Netflix, on the series, Daredevil, which is much grittier and violent than anything the studio has previously produced. "Marvel wanted to try something a little more adult, a little darker, and a little more morally complex," showrunner, Steven S. DeKnight, told FilmInk. "Not to take away from the other shows or the movies - because I enjoy all of them - but Marvel has enough content out there that they felt comfortable with trying something different, and out of the box." To grow, you have to change, and Marvel has been doing that in spades, and inspiring other producers of superhero content in the process.

THE TECHNOLOGY IS HERE

"Studios are looking for comic book characters because they're now able to do them properly thanks to the advances in special effects and computer generated imagery," Stan Lee told FilmInk in 2004. "When you see the special effects in Spider-Man or X-Men, you can't believe it. They couldn't have done this years ago." While Tim Burton could effectively make Batman in 1989, there's no way that he could have pulled off a much more fantastical property like, say, Guardians Of The Galaxy, with equal panache. But with extraordinary advances in movie technology, filmmakers can now create almost anything that is in their head, and that has largely made the influx of superhero movies possible. "It's everything combined," director, Zack Snyder, said at a pre-screening Sydney Q&A for his 2013 foundation-laying epic, Man Of Steel. "It's the modern mythology, it's visual effects technology at its height, and it's also, if done right, about compelling characters, especially now that we have so many A-list actors on board. It's a Hollywood wet dream in that way, and then everything comes together in box office madness."

And the younger, tech-savvy directors of today know (usually) exactly how to employ these special effects. "Zack Snyder is a visionary guy," said the director's Man Of Steel co-star, Kevin Costner, who is, of course, an Oscar winning director in his own right. "I see stuff like that and go, 'Fuck! I couldn't direct like that!' I like to direct cowboy movies with fires and horses! I wouldn't know how to budget the stuff that Zack does," he laughed to FilmInk. "I wouldn't know if anybody would allow me to do a movie like that! I wouldn't know how to do it. So that's when I'm very content to work with another director - you go, 'Wow, you just blew up a whole town! How did you do that?' That's my whole budget right there - that town! That's the whole budget for my western."

THE TENTPOLE MOVIE: INSTANT RECOGNITION

It's now an inarguable fact: movies are being made, distributed, and watched differently. Because of the now varied means through which viewers can access movies - both legally and illegally - when it comes to the big screen, Hollywood's studios now have to look at a much wider market. They have to make big films that everyone around the world will have an interest in, and superhero movies fit perfectly into that financial reality. "It's a very corporate environment," veteran producer, Tony Bill - who worked on seventies classics like The Sting and Hearts Of The West - told FilmInk in 2013. "Movies get made because they have foreign appeal. They generally don't get made with one source of financing unless it's a studio. And studio films are definitely not what they used to be. There are a lot of wonderful films getting made that are more than a product or commodity, but 70% of our income comes from outside the US now. Filmmakers now have to make that an important consideration. We're making movies for export. It's not just, 'Let's make a movie because it's going to be good.' There's no longer an ample enough motivation for somebody to invest in a movie that they don't think is going to turn out well. Now people want to invest in a movie because it's got a big star in it, or because it's based on previously successful material, or because there are tie-ins with McDonalds. You've got huge foreign appeal because you've got explosions, or vampires, or superheroes. It's much more calculated now."

When studios pump millions of dollars into a film, it obviously salves their concerns when it's one that will register with audiences immediately, whether it's Mad Max: Fury Road or Pitch Perfect 2. And there's nothing more instantly recognisable than superheroes. For Hollywood studios, it's an easy sell. Whether it's China, Japan, Australia, or England, everyone knows who Superman and Batman are. "You're dealing with a worldwide brand," Man Of Steel and Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice producer, Charles Roven, told FilmInk. "There's built-in pressure when you're dealing with something so iconic. It's amazing to think how many people have grown up admiring someone like Superman for over 75 years." As long as superhero movies are easy to sell, studios will keep making them.

THE BALANCING ACT

One of the most difficult challenges that any superhero movie has to undertake is pleasing the hardcore fans, while also appealing to the audience at large. The best films in the genre have successfully walked that tightrope, and have appealed to both elements of the audience, leading to continued popularity. "It's always a concern of the filmmakers," producer, Ralph Winter - who worked on the initial X-Men films - told FilmInk on the set of X-Men Origins: Wolverine. "The people financing the movie want to be sure that it gets to the widest audience; they can't just spend this kind of money on a narrow audience. But critically, you've got to pay attention to that narrow audience, and know that they're repeat customers. They're the ones who talk on the internet, and they set the tone and the buzz for everything else. We're watching the internet. We've got our own geeks on board who are watching what people are saying online, and we've got our own internal set of controls on that. Achieving that balance is important to us. But you defy that when you know that you're doing the right thing for the story. In the comics, Hugh Jackman's not the same height as a character like Logan, but Hugh Jackman's the right guy for the role." Says Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice producer, Charles Roven: "The internet is both your friend, and also a frustrating companion barking in your ear. Sometimes you want to say, 'Just shut the fuck up for a minute!' [Laughs] But it doesn't."

A LITTLE ALCHEMY

"There are no rules," Stan Lee told FilmInk in 2004. "A film has to be a good film, whether it's from a comic or not. If you're doing a screen version of a bestselling novel, the most important thing to think of is, 'What made it a bestselling book? What was the element that the public liked?' Then you make sure that you keep that element in the movie. So many times I feel that they miss that. A perfect example is when they did a live action Spider-Man series for television in the seventies. I didn't think it was good because they omitted everything that made Spider-Man popular. They omitted the humour, and the personality. He was just a guy walking down the street. He'd see a crime being committed and go, 'Oh, I'd better become Spider-Man!' Then he went and caught the crook. There was no dimension. A superhero movie has to be a good movie by itself. It needs to have characters that you believe in and that you care about, and situations that you understand and that you want to know what's going to happen. Those rules apply whether it's based on a comic book or whether you're writing a movie. There's no difference." In short, a superhero movie - like any movie - has to have a certain intangible quality that just, well, makes it work...and the best ones do, and the best ones are what keep audiences wanting more. "You need the storyteller," Captain America himself, Chris Evans, told FilmInk. "You need someone who has the ability to tell a story, and someone who just knows what's good. You need someone who can watch a scene and say that it's not working. It's intangible. I don't know how to describe it. Let's call it magic."

TO BE CONTINUED, OR 'NUFF SAID?

"I sometimes enjoy them because they are basic and simple and go well with popcorn," Oscar winning The Revenant director, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, told Deadline of the current swarm of superhero movies. "The problem is that sometimes they purport to be profound, and based on some Greek mythological kind of thing. And they are honestly very right wing. I always see them as killing people because they do not believe in what you believe, or they are not being who you want them to be. I hate that, and I don't respond to those characters. They have been poison, this cultural genocide, because the audience is so overexposed to plot and explosions and shit that doesn't say anything about the experience of being human."

Though they're hugely popular, superhero movies are not popular with everyone. Whether it's Nightcrawler director, Dan Gilroy ("Independent films are holdouts against a tsunami of superhero movies. We have survived, and that's true spirit"); Aussie Infini filmmaker, Shane Abbess ("I love the superhero films, but the origin formula, I mean, Christ, I get it, you have to be relatable, and you have to overcome adversity. Fuck, I get it"), or Kiwi actor, Martin Henderson ("The superhero stuff is something that I'm personally not a huge fan of...it doesn't appeal to me as an actor"), the public detractors are certainly out there, and they're more than happy to have a swing at something so popular. Have superhero movies reached saturation point? "Oh sure, we're worried about that," X-Men Origins: Wolverine producer, Ralph Winter, told FilmInk way back in 2009. "I mean, is there a saturation point on talking animated animal movies? I'm amazed that they keep making them! It's about whether we can continue to deliver good stories. People always want to see a good story about a hero."

Marvel boss, Kevin Feige (who has movies planned out until 2019), has been asking himself this very question for many years now. "I've worried about that since I first started at Marvel fourteen years ago," he laughed to FilmInk. "After X-Men 2, I started being asked, 'How long can this last?' I always thought: I think that it's going to last a long time, as long as they're all different, and as long as they're all unique. If every movie had just been a kid in his bedroom putting on a mask and fighting crime, we wouldn't be making many more of them. Thankfully, the Marvel characters are all so unique, and we have thousands and thousands of characters to draw from. Could they all be movies? Probably not. But as long as they're interesting, we can keep doing them for a long time."

With Marvel Studios in full swing, the relatively nascent production house will now have a true rival with The DC Extended Universe set to crank into overdrive with Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice just the first shot ( Man Of Steel was more like the loading of the ammo) in what will be a sustained cinematic salvo, with Suicide Squad set for release, Wonder Woman currently in production, and films featuring Aquaman, The Flash, Cyborg, Green Lantern, and more all slated for future release. Warner and DC will then unleash its version of a nuclear strike with two Zack Snyder-directed Justice League movies (in 2017 and 2019), which will bring together all of the aforementioned characters. "We've been talking a lot about where we're going to go with Justice League...we kind of knew what Justice League was going to be pretty early on, which allowed us to lay the groundwork in a lot of ways," says Zack Snyder. "When you see the movie, you'll really get a sense that there's a second layer coming, and filtering down through the film, as far as what's possible. We slowly introduce the other characters and how they play and what is their purpose and where they are in the world. Justice League is about turning the whole thing up to eleven as much as you can, with all these guys trying to work together, if that's possible. That's a lot of fun for me."

It would appear that the age of the superhero is far, far from over...

Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice is released in cinemas on March 24. Captain America: Civil War is released in cinemas on April 28.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Age Of Heroes: Why Are Superhero Movies So Popular?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With this week's Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice and TV's Daredevil, Arrow, Supergirl, Gotham, and The Flash, superheroes are everywhere. But why are they so popular now, and will this pop cultural domination last? HEROES R US Cinematically, it is the age of the superhero.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Who Are The Remaining Unused Marvel Characters And Could They Make A Viable Movie?

Last week, DC made waves with a rumor suggesting that Warner Brothers was possibly committing to seven superhero films in their near future, bringing the total of upcoming movies in the genre to 23. But what people forget is that while WB flexes its muscle, , in addition to its crammed slate for the next few years, still has a ridiculously long list of untapped characters, both over at Disney as well as other studios like Fox, Universal and Sony.

For the time being, Sony's got four more films in the " Spider-Man" universe planned based on studio announcements. Fox has release dates for the next " Fantastic Four", " X-Men" and " Wolverine" movies. And Marvel has expanded their " Avengers " world to allow for multiple heroes to thrive in their own movies, and thereby rack up huge box office numbers. Does the marketplace suggest we want to see these films? A superhero film rarely loses money in this filmmaking economy, so clearly people are fans.

But the current well has to dry up soon. Marvel's day players that include Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans are only signed up until " Avengers 3. Similarly, Fox has banked on Hugh Jackman's Wolverine for seven films so far, with reportedly two more on deck, stretching him thin. Sony's already experiencing the growing pains of swapping out Tobey Maguire for Andrew Garfield, as Garfield's films aren't nearly as popular, plus there's a limit to how many existing big-name characters can be rebooted in the same way as Spider-Man: if there's no connective tissue between the films, re-casting is a cinch, but because the expanded universe approach is so popular, it becomes a bigger deal when you have new actors play familiar faces.

Which is why, in addition to finding a smooth way to phase out the more familiar actors in these movies, the studios need to develop new brand names. What lies beyond Professor X and his X-Men? Who will assemble when the Avengers retire? Fortunately, we're dealing with Marvel, that not only still owns a massive library of characters (of some diversity and depth), but has doled out a fair number of properties to the aforementioned Fox, Sony and Universal. The possibilities are endless, depressingly so for anyone who feels like we've already reached critical mass as regards comic book films. With pivotal movies like " The Sinister Six" and "Doctor Strange" on the horizon, what's left for Marvel? We decided to take a peek and see just who owns the last remaining Marvel properties, and just how viable they might be.

Sony
Black Cat
If the rumors are true, Sony could end up giving "Spider-Man" a brief rest, sidelining the universe established in "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" that set the stage for the upcoming "Sinister Six" movie. But while postponing " The Amazing Spider-Man 3" means letting certain loose threads dangle, it doesn't have to mean that the entire mythology is given a break. Of the many franchise hints in "The Amazing Spider-Man 2", the one people seem to gloss over is the introduction of rising star Felicity Jones as Felicia Hardy. Fans know this to be the alter ego of criminal Black Cat, who has alternated between hero and villain during her 35-year-old history. Black Cat has had a full comic book career as a cat burglar and occasional superhero, and it would be yet another stab at DC if Marvel was able to grant this character her own adventure film while DC continued to ignore the commercial viability of a well-made " Catwoman " movie.

Spider-Woman
In the tricky game of rights roulette, Sony actually owns the film rights to all Marvel characters with the prefix "Spider-". That includes this frequent Avengers member, who rarely, if ever, interacted with Spider-Man in the comics. Bearing little resemblance to her male counterpart, Jessica Drew (the most prominent of several characters bearing the Spider-Woman moniker at Marvel) was in fact a spy who had just uncovered the fact that she had been brainwashed, her past missing, a kind of female arachnid Jason Bourne, then, though the earlier comics featuring her character focussed on supernatural enemies, leaning towards horror and suspense. In recent years she's represented more of a common costumed crimefighter, potentially enough to convince Sony that this is a character worth using, and not just a dumb brand extension.

Ultimate Spider-Man
In the comics' "Ultimate" storylines, Marvel made the bold choice of definitively killing Peter Parker. But his actions during his brief career as Spider-Man inspired a young black Hispanic teenager to become the new Spidey, equipped with Parker's powers due to a because-of-comic-books coincidence. As Morales is basically a child, his character's adventures have been filled with a joy and enthusiasm the "regular" "Spider-Man" comics have not matched. With the two Andrew Garfield "Spider-Man" offerings suggesting the public may be growing tired of Parker, why not make the bold decision of introducing fan-favorite Morales into the cinematic universe?

OTHER SONY PROPERTIES:
In addition to the considerable rogues in the "Spider-Man" gallery, there's a subset of occult characters like Man-Wolf and Morbius that could conceivably carry their own films, though Morbius might also be a part of the " Blade" package. The rights issues to these characters gets fairly confusing.
Universal
Namor: The Sub-Mariner
Despite never getting a greelight for actual production, Universal has managed to hang onto the film rights to Marvel's first-ever superhero. Namor rules the deep sea empire of Atlantis, though his executive decisions have labeled him an eco-terrorist and a tyrant to surface-dwellers. While ultimately Namor fights for the humans as well as his own kind, his biggest enemies have always been his own hubris and vanity. Namor is rumored to possibly be Universal's big, unrevealed 2016 release, but right now that's simply speculation. Still, it would give the character his own showcase before we really got to know Jason Momoa's Aquaman, DC's Atlantis-based superhero, who will reportedly only make a brief appearance in 2016's " Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice."

20th Century Fox
Alpha Flight
Marvel recently trademarked nine titles for possible future film production, and surprisingly Canada's number one mutant superteam made the list. The squad, which has always had mysterious ties to Wolverine, works for Canada's Department H, an organization in charge of facing off against superpowered rogues. It's a basic set-up, but longtime members of Alpha Flight includes popular characters like Guardian, Puck and Sasquatch. If Fox wants to demonstrate there is life beyond Xavier's School, heading up north is a definite possibility.

Dazzler
In many comic circles, Dazzler is a punchline of a character, a Marvel creation meant to capitalize on the disco craze juuuuust right after disco basically died. Of course, the same could be said of " Ant-Man," who is getting his own blockbuster next summer, (a baldfaced mockery of common sense). Dazzler went on to outpace her chintzy origins, her character dabbling in various musical genres as she utilized her mutant powers to turn sound into light and energy, becoming not necessarily a superhero but a pop star. At last, we can make the movie about someone who develops extraordinary powers and turns them into an innately marketable skill! "Dazzler" could offer a great part for a young actress/singer, bringing some fun and musicality to the rather dour "X-Men" universe and expanding the movies' fanbase considerably. And can you imagine the soundtrack?

Deadpool
Ah, that famously orphaned property. First-timer Tim Hill was set to direct a script by Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick (" Zombieland") with Ryan Reynolds firmly in the lead. But that project, an R-rated, fourth-wall-breaking mutant adventure, never really gained traction with the studio. It didn't help that Reynolds himself starred in a couple of bombs that pretty much killed his commercial appeal, including the comic book-based " Green Lantern" and " R.I.P.D.". But in Hollywood, all it takes is one hit to make you suddenly seem viable again (or no hits, if you're Colin Farrell), so if Reynolds gets hot or even lukewarm (this project is basically tethered to him) don't be surprised to see Fox kicking the tires once again.

Gambit
Channing Tatum is in agreement that he is playing Gambit. Producer Lauren Shuler-Donner is saying he is Gambit. And yet, no one at Fox is saying a "Gambit" movie is a go, beyond writers like Simon Kinberg saying they hope to make it happen. Which is interesting - not only is Gambit not necessarily the most commercially viable character, he's barely factored into the movies, to date only played by Taylor Kitsch in " X-Men Origins: Wolverine". A $60 million spinoff starring Kitsch might be a smart commercial idea, and even bringing Kitsch back for " X-Men: Apocalypse " would make sense. But Tatum's star within the "X-Men" universe would be much, much brighter so a "Gambit" movie with him in the role would need to accommodate that.

Silver Surfer
Since the 1990's, Constantin Films has owned the rights to the Silver Surfer and has struggled in vain to spotlight him as the star of a new movie. When the character finally popped up in 2007's " Fantastic Four: Rise Of The Silver Surfer", it was supposedly the backdoor to his own film penned by J. Michael Straczynski (" Babylon 5"). Unfortunately, that film flopped, killing hopes for the long-in-development "Silver Surfer" movie that at one point back in the nineties was going to star Johnny Depp. That being said, Fox has announced a "mystery" project that is slated for release in 2018. Maybe they'll be attempting to isolate Silver Surfer from the Fantastic Four for his own adventure? It's very possible there is truth to the rumor that Fox allowed their " Daredevil " rights to expire in order to keep the rights to "Silver Surfer" for that exact purpose.

X-Force
While Jeff Wadlow (" Kick Ass 2") was hired to write an " X-Force" movie, "X-Force" creator Rob Liefeld tweeted recently that "X-Men: Days Of Future Past" seriously put the film in jeopardy. Or at least Wadlow's vision for the film, as in the comics, X-Force has taken on many forms. Originally they were an offshoot of the "New Mutants", a paramilitary mutant team dedicated to neutralizing dangerous mutant threats without the (supposed) safety or morality concerns of Xavier's students. Leader Cable seems like a viable addition to the movie universe, and there are a number of X-Force characters that have yet to be introduced to the movies that could feature in this film. In recent years, X-Force was led by Wolverine and featured a couple of more familiar X-Men characters however, which means this could conceivably function as that elusive " X-Men 4 " everyone has wanted to see.

OTHER FOX PROPERTIES:
It's hard to deny that Fox has the rights to the two greatest Marvel villains of all time in Magneto and Doctor Doom. So Sony may be intrigued by a "Sinister Six" film, but solo "Magneto" and "Doctor Doom" movies would make more sense. Another X-team that could surface are the "X-Factor Investigations", based on a later version of the X-Factor team in the comics centered on mysteries and led by the very cinematic fan-favorite Multiple Man.
Marvel
Black Panther
Still waiting for a callup to the big leagues is Marvel's premiere black superhero, the costumed ruler of the fictional nation of Wakanda (which itself has already earned references in the Marvel films). Black Panther has no real abilities other than peak human athleticism and superior intellect, making him something of a Batman analog. But he's also got an army, ruling over Wakanda, a place considered rich in Vibranium, the rare metal used to forge Captain America's shield. While rumors suggest the opening of "Avengers: Age Of Ultron" will take place in Wakanda, the studio has not yet committed to making a standalone Black Panther movie. But their Phase 3 lineup features a number of release dates, of which just two titles are unaccounted for, and one is expected to be " Doctor Strange ", which means "Black Panther" could be next in line to join the Marvel stable.

Blade
Marvel has managed to reacquire a number of characters originally licensed to other studios, including Hulk, Daredevil and Ghost Rider. But just bringing the characters back doesn't mean there are plans in store for them. Still, it's been ten years since " Blade Trinity " ended the "Blade" saga, more than enough time to bring the Daywalker back. More specifically, the character can now be integrated into the larger Marvel universe, possibly in a team atmosphere. Marvel's got several characters based in the supernatural and the occult, including Doctor Strange and Ghost Rider. Why not have them together in their own film, fighting the ghouls and spirits that wouldn't cross paths with the Avengers?

Captain Marvel
Carol Danvers has had one of the most colorful existences of any female character in comics, though it's been in recent years that Marvel has brought her to the forefront. She's a literal heavy hitter, gifted with flight, super strength and invulnerability, earning her Captainship by serving in the air force before developing her otherworldly powers. Danvers would make an excellent addition to the current "Avengers" team, adding diversity and sheer power to the lineup. And she's already rumored to be part of "Avengers: Age of Ultron," but so far that remains to be seen.

The Inhumans
Recently, Marvel's "Inhumanity" storyline has imagined an Earth where several humans are actually members of the Inhuman race, evolutionarily advanced beings from another world. This latest development has made these characters very much like mutants, born with unexpected abilities and seen as a danger to others. Of course, Marvel doesn't have the rights to mutants, which explains why the comic company has pushed this storyline to familiarize audiences with the concepts of Inhumans simply living amongst the other heroes. Which makes it easy to imagine a movie based upon the Inhumans, particularly the royal family headed by Black Bolt and Medusa, in which they could feature the mutant characters they can actually use (Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, perhaps) as new members of the Inhuman race.

Moon Knight
Marc Spector is a handful. This Jewish mercenary was left for dead in the Egyptian desert, only to be resurrected by the god Khonshu and turned into a warrior for justice. Returning to the states meant hiding his resurrection, however, in a series of false identities that have apparently given him multiple personality disorder. So yeah, Moon Knight is a hero with more than a few issues. There was a rumor a "Moon Knight" television show was being attempted years ago, but there's no reason why the character can't pop up in one of the new films, or even star in his own movie, provided they got the right actor. For the record, Tom Cruise would be an incredible Moon Knight.

Power Pack
This all-ages comic traced the evolution of an all-sibling kids superhero team, gifted with their abilities due to the experiments of their father and the influence of an alien race. While they often fought alongside adult heroes, there were comics where the Power Pack took on ground level issues, like bullies and schoolwork. Not every Marvel movie has to deal with the end of the world, and there's no reason why a kids'-friendly team can't interact with Marvel's other heroes. All it takes is a kid-centric filmmaker with a little bit of imagination to get somewhere with the Power clan.

The Punisher
We've had three onscreen Punisher adventures so far. Why a fourth? Especially considering, for starters, that the Punisher concept on its own doesn't have a lot of juice, and " Punisher War Zone" pretty much exhausted the potential for future straightforward Punisher films? Well, as in the comics, the Punisher's greatest stories come from his interactions with other characters, specifically the more fantastical heroes with moral scruples. If Marvel is smart, they'll have Frank Castle guest-star on a couple of episodes of the "Daredevil" series for Netflix, serving as a springboard for a film where the enforcer takes to the streets of the Marvel universe to dispense deadly justice to the hooligans the Avengers can't grab.

Runaways
No one knows exactly what happened with Peter Sollet's " Runaways" movie, reportedly one of Marvel's first planned solo movies. The concept is rich: a group of young teens learn that their parents are evil supervillains and team up to steal their equipment and tools in order to save the world. You could do this on a budget, and if Marvel is interested in diversifying beyond simple $200 million tentpoles, this is the ideal direction to go, courting the families that might find " Captain America " a bit too intense for their kids. Fortunately, the comics have enough suburban dysfunction to work on their own as enjoyable stories of a group of young avengers coming together.

She-Hulk
The associations and insinuations made by people like David Goyer are unpleasant, but beyond that ignorance lies an incredible character. When Jennifer Walters is injured in an accident, she needs a family blood transfusion to survive, but the only possible source is her cousin, Bruce Banner. Walters eventually becomes a green-skinned colossus, but unlike her cousin she has control over it, and while she goes the predictable route of fighting crime with her enhanced skill and strength, she later becomes a successful criminal defense attorney, going through legal briefs during the day and saving the world at night. She-Hulk comics always promise heavy duty action as well as comedy that comes not only from the innate absurdity of She-Hulk's existence, but the possibility she is aware she's in a comic. These factors have allowed her to establish her own identity in the comics, and they should one day provide fodder for a fun movie, particularly if she fights alongside her cousin.

Thunderbolts
The Thunderbolts are credited with one of comics' great reveals: they were introduced as reformed villains now dedicated to being superheroes. But soon, their true motivations were revealed, showing them to be opportunists attempting a long con in order to fool the world into earning their trust. In the movies, it doesn't need to be so complex, particularly considering the movie universe would never trust the villains already established in the films. But what if Marvel did attempt an all-villain jamboree, teaming maybe Loki, Justin Hammer, the Red Skull, the Abomination and Baron Von Strucker in their own film? What hardcore Marvel fan isn't going to want to see that?

OTHER MARVEL PROPERTIES:
The number of characters and brands Marvel currently possesses is ridiculous. In addition to potentially spinning off characters like Black Widow, Rocket Raccoon and the Heroes For Hire into their own films, there's a backlog of single characters that could pop up in Marvel stories for years on end. Marvel claims they've planned until 2028. Considering whom they own, you better believe it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Who Are The Remaining Unused Marvel Characters And Could They Make A Viable Movie?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Who Are The Remaining Unused Marvel Characters And Could They Make A Viable Movie? Last week, DC made waves with a rumor suggesting that Warner Brothers was possibly committing to seven superhero films in their near future, bringing the total of upcoming movies in the genre to 23.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Two things quickly become evident when putting together a list of the 100 Best Superhero Movies of All Time. First, this is the Golden Age for such films, a decade where technology, long-unrequited fandom and surging popular awareness have all combined to thrill moviegoers and make Hollywoodbillions of dollars. Second, it's still fair to say that most superhero films are not that good. There's no real contradiction at play here. The niche just lacks the pedigree of its fellow movie genres. Though superhero comic books may have started to make a dint in popular culture 75 years ago (give or take), technology only crossed over from hindrance to enabling force in the last 20 years or so. As a result, while curating a 100 Best Westerns of All Time or 100 Best Documentaries of All Time list requires the exclusion of arguably good films to select the best 100-for superhero movies? The pickings get slim after 40. In fact, the real challenge for this list was choosing amongst the dreck (some of it beloved dreck!) that would fill out the bottom half. It turns out it's much easier to argue for or against a top 10 film's exact placement (and frankly, compelling arguments could be made for almost any of our top 5 as deserving the #1 position), than weighing the relative "merits" of Masters of the Universe, Swamp Thing and Elektra.

This also means the bottom half of this list will change swiftly compared to, say, The Best B-Movies of All Time. In fact, it's a safe assumption if there are 15 superhero movies in the next three years, at least 14 of them will knock numbers 86-99 off this list. (Our #100 is a bit of a wild card.)

Finally, some criteria. To be considered for this list, a film must possess at least two of the following three qualities: 1) It must involve costumed shenanigans, 2) It must involve a superpowered protagonist and/or 3) the protagonist must exist in a world where the supernatural/extraordinary is demonstrably present. These criteria are why meta-commentary films like Kick-Ass and Super are not on this list. And it's also why some films with pulpy characters like Zorro, Tarzan and Conan are not, while others like The Phantom are. (Zane's costume combined with the Skulls of Touganda do the trick.) Admittedly, the lines gets blurry. Also absent from this list is any consideration of foreign superhero films. That's not because some are not worthy-especially given the movie quality issue mentioned at the top-it's just an area we'd rather get better versed in before pouring into this list. Next year, perhaps.

100. The Fantastic Four (1994)

Not appearing on this list: The abortive 2015 Fantastic Four, all copies of which need to be purged off the face of the Earth if our species is ever to be forgiven for its transgressions. Granted, the two Tim Story Fantastic Four films do appear on this list, but I'll let you in on a secret: If you're only ever going to watch one Fantastic Four movie (which would be wise), you should really make it this one. No, the "Corman Fantastic Four" (only produced, not directed by the legendary B-movie maker) doesn't have much of a budget behind it. And no, the film wasn't deemed worthy of an actual release, being shelved for decades until it finally leaked online. But man, this film has heart. It's a truly sincere take on translating the adventures of Marvel's First Family into an all-ages superhero movie, and at times it's significantly more enjoyable and competent than one would expect from a cast of unknowns and a shoestring budget. Do the costumes look good? Not quite, but they do look accurate to the comics more than any of the subsequent films, especially in their portrayal of a grandiosely gesturing Dr. Doom and the frankly impressive-looking Thing. The special effects, on the other hand, are absolutely horrendous, but in a way that will inspire smiles and laughter rather than disgust. Corman's Fantastic Four has the simpleminded optimism of a 15-minute Saturday morning cartoon, stretched into a feature film, and its cheerful sincerity is infectious. Fire it up on YouTube, where it's been uploaded in full, and you might surprise yourself by hanging in there for a full 90 minutes. -Jim Vorel

99. Superhero Movie (2010)

While we'll reserve the #100 spot on a list for a movie that's unique or otherwise worth keeping around even if the quality would not normally merit the slot, in this case-on this list-the #99 spot is the most ephemeral of positions. It says, "I will be the first film nixed when this list is updated, and the list's curators are perfectly fine with that." (In fact, come back March 3rd after Logan premieres.) Such is the lot of the factory assembly line genre spoof, . Mostly a riff on , with healthy amounts of other titles thrown against the wall in case they stick, this film follows newly fledged hero Dragonfly ( DrakeBell) as he learns to use his powers and tries to get the girl. There are many jokes from the David Zucker (the film's producer) school of nyucks, but the funniest does not land with half the humor of the most throw-away line in . (Of course, that's not really a fair comparison, but if lazy spoofing is your kryptonite, stay away.) -Michael Burgin

98. The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl in 3-D (2005)

A strange sort of coda to Robert Rodriguez's Spy Kids franchise, this movie leaves behind the kid-sized spy film genre to spend some time with its close cousin, the superhero movie. Unfortunately, by this film, the sense of fun and magic so prevalent in the first two Spy Kids has pretty much drained out, along with the box office performance of the third and fourth films. Though a different genre, cast and world, there's just not much wonder here, unless seeing a pint-sized version of Twilight's Jacob (Taylor Lautner) appeals. Whether The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl would have been better without the post-production 3-D superimposition is hard to say. But it's unlikely. -M.B.

97. Batman and Robin (1997)

Even in a genre that, last decade notwithstanding, has seen more misses than hits, Joel Schumacher's fourth installment in Warner Bros.' go at a rejuvenated Batman franchise is pretty horrendous. (Editorial confession: One of only two films in a lifetime of film-going out of which I've nearly walked.) Though superhero films in particular (and fantasy and sci-fi films in general) possess a much greater range of tolerances when it comes to style-versus-substance ratios, in Batman and Robin we get to see exactly how far off the tracks and over a cliff a movie can go when "style" scores a complete victory over substance. It's not pretty. A silver lining? Um ... well ... I guess there is so much to choose from when determining the worst things about the film? Bat nipples. A neon light logo on the interior of a closed motorcycle storage bin. An Ah-noldian Mister Freeze that particularly stings given the character's definitive 1992 presentation in Batman: The Animated Series' "Heart of Ice" episode. The steady, standing-on-the-ground video confession of Poison Ivy (Uma Thurman) that was taken by a Batman ( George Clooney) entangled in vines on the ceiling. So. Much. Suck. The only thing Batman and Robin has going for it? Well, Schumacher himself has apologized for the film. Like, a lot. -M.B.

96. The Punisher (1989)

Whether Dolph Lundgren is the Marvel Universe's best on-screen Punisher or its absolute worst, it's hard to deny that the man strikes an imposing figure. Though proceeding reboots got grittier and grittier, Mark Goldblatt's 1989 attempt at bringing the popular comic to theaters beams with all the sallow glow of '80s R-rated action thrillers at their '80s-est. Portraying Frank Castle as an inhuman Angel of Death, Lundgren is seemingly imbued by grief with indestructible murder superpowers and a paint-by-numbers six-o-clock shadow, surrounded by such era archetypes as world-weary black cop (Louis Gossett Jr.), spunky and secret-pretty lady detective (Nancy Everhard) and forever-greasy Mafia don (Jeroen Krabbe). Lundgren isn't much of a physical action star either-his body is just too big to move with any sort of grace-but Goldblatt isn't much interested in physical filmmaking anyway. Instead, his Punisher is an early attempt to make iconography a hallmark of superhero films, indulging more in searing one-shot images in the viewer's mind than making sure the spatial dynamics of his setpieces make any sense. Today, an R-rated Marvel movie is an anomaly, but at the butt-end of the '80s, it was a revelation: This isn't all kids' stuff. -Dom Sinacola

95. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2011)

Directors Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor give Nicolas Cagethe Johnny Blaze he's spent over two decades earning in the sequel to the much-tamer-by-comparison Ghost Rider, and Cage responds by demonstrating he's more than capable of living up to the levels of asshole insanity the directing duo are willing to lob at the Marvel franchise. Probably the closest any superhero film has come to legitimate slapstick, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance showcases how Neveldine and Taylor aren't so much stymied by the rigors of big-studio blockbuster filmmaking as they are totally unable to understand it, practically incompetent in crafting something with a shred of consistent tone, pace or point. Meanwhile, Cage sweats profusely and trundles painfully from one disjointed scene to the next, delivering lines in what can only be described as Cage-ian-simultaneously unhinged and purposeful-joined by Idris Elbadonning a Pepé Le Pew accent and Christopher Lambert looking like he decided last-minute on a bargain-bin Kwaidan Halloween costume. Which is to say: Spirit of Vengeance is a comic book movie to its core, visually inventive and narratively illogical, providing our current superhero-saturated climate with the kind of no-fucks-given attitude it will always need. -D.S.

94. Jumper (2008)

As we touched on in the intro, if a film is here this year, it's pretty much guaranteed it won't still be on the list next year, since all seven or eight superhero films scheduled for 2017 release are likely to land higher. Sad? Well, actually, no, since it's unlikely any tears will be shed for this ballpark-faithful film version of Steven Gould's 1992 novel. Starring Hayden Christensen in probably his last starring role, the film deals with a plot that could pretty much be a superhero film trope in and of itself-if you have powers, there's likely a secret society looking for you, either to recruit or kill you. In this instance, the power is teleportation, and the goal is extermination. Probably the only lasting mark the film will leave on many viewers will be from seeing a principal (Nick Fury/Samuel L. Jackson) and a secondary character (Yondu/Michael Rooker) from the MCU in a movie together. Eh, that's as good a takeaway as any. -M.B.

93. Supergirl (1984)

1984's Supergirl is a strange, misguided slice of the pre-Tim Burton Batman superhero age, and an attempt to spin-off the rapidly deteriorating Christopher Reeve Superman series for a female protagonist. That might have been all well and good, except for the fact thatJeannot Szwarc's Supergirl is so damned weird. The plot revolves around a MacGuffin called the "omegahedron," a powerful object that is lost by Kara Zor-El's (Helen Slater) city of Kryptonian survivors and stranded on Earth, where it falls into the hands of...a witch? What's a girl to do but also travel to Earth, where instead of searching for her objective, Kara enrolls in an all-girls school-because hey, why not? Stranger still is the witchy villain Selena, played by Mommie Dearest's Faye Dunaway, who obtains the powerful object for world domination but then instead gets sidetracked in trying to use it to make a janitor fall in love with her. These all sound like jokes, but I assure you, they are not. Coupled with special effects well below the par of the Superman series at the time, Supergirl was a rather spectacular box office bomb that has since been swept under the rug of polite conversation. With the right crowd it can still deliver an enjoyably campy evening. -J.V.

92. Push (2009)

Another film that proves having a solid cast and an interesting premise can easily be undone if the aforementioned premise is not so much explored as dumped like a bag of hammers on the viewer. Chris Evans, who ties Ryan Reynoldsfor appearing as the most different characters in films on the list, plays the lead, Nick, a Mover. (And no, that does not involve helping people get furniture into a new home.) He spends most of the film helping Cassie (Dakota Fanning), a young Watcher ( not one of the bald-headed observers from Marvel Comics), and fighting Carver (Djimon Hounsou), a Pusher. (Nope.) Unlike many of the films in this area code, I suspect the presence of MCU stalwart Evans (Oh, Captain, my Captain!), Fanning and even Hounsou will cause people to give Push a chance despite its lackluster Rotten Tomatoes score. Oh, well. Some lessons are best learned firsthand. -M.B.

91. The Toxic Avenger (1986)

The Toxic Avenger, or simply "Toxie" as he's known to fans, is the mascot and long-running figurehead of B-movie studio Troma Entertainment, having to date starred in four bone-crushing films. Born when a hapless nerd (Mark Torgl) falls into a barrel of toxic waste, Toxie (Mitch Cohen) is part Batman, part Swamp Thing and part Jason Voorhees, except his ire is thankfully directed solely at the legions of scumbags who ceaselessly seem to populate and spawn in the fictional Tromaville, NJ. A word to the wise: The Toxic Avenger isn't for consumption by those without a strong stomach, although you could say that about most any of Troma's classics. Their films aren't so much "bottom of the barrel" or "lowest common denominator" as they are sub-denominatorial, reveling in their own poor taste and crassness, simultaneously parodying themselves and their own violent, sexual and scatological excesses. There're no pretensions toward art in a Toxic Avenger movie, simply wish-fulfillment: a monster movie crossed with Death Wish, as performed by high school students. To quote the trailer: "The muggers and rapists didn't know what law and order was until the Toxic Avenger came to town!" -J.V.

90. Punisher: War Zone (2008)

A neon noir reveling in vulgarity, Punisher: War Zone may be the nastiest Marvel movie the company's ever put their name behind (counting ), mostly because of Ray Stevenson, who plays Frank Castle with enough gnarled dread to make any of film's levity seem well earned. Director Lexi Alexander of course doesn't shy away from the franchise's patented superhuman hyper-violence-witness more than one fully collapsed face within the course of three minutes-and her sense of space in otherwise straightforward action scenes is pretty impeccable. All in all, it's tasteless, gross, visceral, endlessly surprising and totally without expectation-it is, in other words, the kind of superhero movie "they" just don't make anymore. I don't know whether that's a good thing or not. -D.S.

89. Elektra (2005)

So many of the films in the lower regions of this list are here because of an inability to capture the comic book aesthetic on screen. Some fall short in casting, budget/special effects, or in even an understanding of the spirit of the source material. Rob Bowman's Elektra fails the old-fashioned way-bad dialogue and a sub-par script. It's also guilty of some of the other, more typical faults: the plot is hardly what any fan of the character would consider "classic Elektra." On the other hand, in her turn as Elektra, Jennifer Garnerjustly escapes the condemnation Ben Affleck got for his go at Daredevil, and the action scenes and cast of villains have some moments, but none sustained enough to replace the feeling on the viewer's part that even if this film was a box office bomb which landed with a critical thud, it might not have missed by as large a distance as many others on this list. But, hey, a miss is a miss, and much like the Man without Fear, Elektra would just have to wait for Netflix for her next iteration. -M.B.

88. X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)

The initial prequel/spin-off from the lucrative franchise is memorable for all the wrong reasons. It has plenty going for it-it features the most popular character from both movie and comics, played by Hugh Jackman in what was already considered a definitive portrayal, and it introduced Wade Wilson-Deadpool!-played by Ryan Reynolds. What did it do with this potential? Ah, squandered like only Hollywood can squander. Jackman still delivers a solid performance, but in what has become a classic superhero film blunder, Reynolds' proto-Deadpool has his power set completely, unnecessarily changed and, worst of all, his mouth sewn shut. With The Wolverine representing a marginal improvement and the forthcoming Logan looking like it may be the best of the three solo films, it seems pretty much guaranteed X-Men Origins: Wolverine will represent the nadir of the Jackman era. And in the next 2-3 years (or however long it takes to release another 13-14 superhero films), this particular nadir won't be on this list at all. -M.B.

87. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)

Despite the 2005 film's mangling of Doctor Doom (Julian McMahon), it was still possible for fans of Marvel's first family to get excited for the sequel. The introduction of the Silver Surfer and the world devouring cosmic being he served had a ready-made three-act structure thanks to the trilogy of comics ( Fantastic Four #48-50) that served as its source material. Bring in the Silver Surfer (Doug Jones/Lawrence Fishburne) in the first act, battle and barely "win" in the second only to have the much greater threat revealed, then battle the big G himself, Galactus, in the third. No way that can be messed up, right? Wait, Galactus is what? Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) just randomly gets all the powers of ... really? Sigh. What makes all this sting worse is the knowledge that this abomination means this particular classic tale has been "used up." Even if Marvel does eventually manage to reboot and do the FF right, they will probably not redo this story-at least not for decades. Dammit. -M.B.

86. My Super Ex-Girlfriend (2006)

One could argue that it is more difficult to spoof a genre when you lack a sufficient number of decent examples of that genre to play off of. From that perspective, it may have been too early for Ivan Reitman's film to hit home in 2006. Then again, My Super Ex-Girlfriend is not really that concerned with the superheroing-it's more about using superpowers to spice up a rather cliché relationship drama. Ultimately, the whole "what if your jealous, possessive girlfriend had superpowers" schtick is not so much explored as it is lazily and obviously applied. That makes My Super Ex-Girlfriend a rather poor example of a superhero film, and regardless of the presence of Uma Thurman and Eddie Izzard, it's not that rewarding of a relationship drama, either. -M.B.

85. Batman (1966)

The Adam West Batman film offers the sort of gleeful insanity you need to inflict upon modern comics fans who are unaware of its existence, because once you've seen it, you'll never forget it. With a plot that defies any attempt toward description, it's the height of camp, featuring incredible performances by Cesar Romero, Frank Gorshin and especially the great Burgess Meredith, as the Joker, Riddler and Penguin respectively, in a team-up to take down the caped crusader and his dopey ward (Burt Ward, that is). The film is just a string of jaw-droppingly silly moments, one right after another-the "shark-repellent bat spray" gives way to Penguin's bird-shaped submarine, and into the two full minutes of West running around with a giant bomb held over his head, unable to find a place to dispose of it. There isn't a more campy or joyful superhero movie on this entire list. But be warned- Batman '66 is best paired with your booze of choice. -J.V.

84. The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (2004)

Some truly bad films merit an extra measure of ridicule for how badly they squander the promise of their source material. Ladies and gentlemen, I bring you The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Based on the critically beloved series by Alan Mooreand Kevin O'Neill, the film has an intriguing premise (thanks to Moore)-what if the characters of Victorian literature's most fantastical works were real people? Add an early example of a big studio's embrace of the steampunk aesthetic, and Stephen Norrington's film certainly has potential, but it wastes little time slipping into an increasingly incomprehensible plot. By the film's end, fans of the series got to leave the theater knowing they have just seen a bad film that pretty much guaranteed a good version of the material would not be seen any time soon. It would also be Sean Connery's final role before retiring from acting. It feels like that should be held against the movie, too. -M.B.

83. Masters of the Universe (1987)

To at least partially understand the dismal failure that was the live-action film adaptation of the popular toy line/cartoon, it helps to know the history of the schlockhouse film studio, Cannon Films. (By the way, if you've never seen the documentary at the link, it's as fascinating as it is funny. And it's very funny.) On the surface, it seemed like an unbeatable proposition: Hugely popular sci-fi/sword and sandal IP, perfect casting for the hero and the heavy, and all-star production design and SFX teams. So how the hell did this thing manage to open third in the box office, and then quietly disappear altogether after a couple weeks? Put simply, it was a staggeringly huge collection of miscalculated decisions made by producers who clearly didn't understand the brand, all rushed through production in eight months. "Kids won't want to see the fantastical world of Eternia. They'll want to see He-Man on Earth, beholden to a couple of whiny teenagers!" (Hi, young Courtney Cox!) "What kind of creature could we get that fills the Orko roll, but is cheaper and much more annoying?" "I don't know. But call Billy Barty's agent and have costuming get an insulting garden gnome motif going." "Frank Langella?! That's a hell of a good get for Skeletor! But I think people know him best as Dracula, so make sure makeup puts some fangs in there, behind his skull teeth." "Let's use as few characters as fans are familiar with as possible that can still technically be identified as Masters of the Universe." "Dolph Lundgren is the most physically perfect specimen to portray He-Man, but I think we need to give him more lines of dialogue." "Gentlemen, congratulations. You've just made Star Warsfor the 1980s!" -Scott Wold

82. Judge Dredd (1995)

The popular British comic book series satirizing the growing fascist trends during the Thatcher/Reagen years was finally brought across the pond in the form of a big-budget Hollywoodmovie. Quite unfortunately, that movie was 1995's Judge Dredd-a film that could not have been more "'90s Action Movie By Committee™" if it tried. A horribly miscast Sylvester Stalloneslurring out his grim lawman dialog-eliciting more laughter than he is projecting authority-also seemed to have worked into his contract that he didn't have to wear the iconic helmet in every scene. To fans of the comic, this is heresy; Dredd's helmet never comes off. Playing the wacky sidekick is Rob Schneider, giving audiences the Full Schneider, which is to say annoying the holy shit out of audiences every time he mugs or utters a panicky, would-be catchphrase (i.e., damn near constantly). The film deservedly flopped at the box office and with critics-Gene Siskel named it one of the worst films of 1995-and it would take 17 years for the stench to disperse long enough to finally do right to existing fans of the property. -S.W.

81. Ghost Rider (2007)

Ghost Rider is one of those characters tailor-made for a Bill Bixby/Hulk type serial existence. Cursed by the devil, this spirit of vengeance roams the earth righting wrongs and seeking redemption ... like Constantine with more flames. Yet, the 2007 film starring Nicolas Cageas the title spirit actually outperformed many of its peers at the box office (more than doubling its initial $110 million budget). Besides answering the otherwise perplexing question, "Why did they make a sequel?!" (also profitable, natch), the film provides a storyline decently true to the source material. Not that there are a ton of characters to draw from, compared to other comics, but in featuring Johnny Blaze, Mephistopheles (Peter Fonda!) and Blackheart (Wes Bentley), the film lives up to that primary responsibility, so often forgot, of initial big screen adaptations-it brings the comic book characters to life. (Though, granted, it's difficult to truly see Johnny Blaze in there with all the Cage everywhere.) -M.B.

80. Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie Film for Theaters (2007)

Viewers looking for plot, logic, punchlines, shame or sense: The Aqua Teen Hunger Force movie will be a desolate slog. Even making it through its full title is a test of patience and reason, one of many walls directors/creators Dave Willis and Matt Maiellero throw up between the casual moviegoer and the movie people are supposed to be paying money to see. But, as they make it clear from the beginning-with a warped take on the classic "Let's all go to the movies!" parade of anthropomorphic theater food intro-they have your money now, and there's nothing you can do about it. Otherwise, ATHFCMFFT is a blown-out episode of the Adult Swimcartoon, following a giant, hovering box of fries, a six-foot milkshake, and a rolling sphere of meat as they "solve" "mysteries" in their local New Jersey town, mysteries which usually involve horrifying violence toward their next-door neighbor, Carl (Dave Willis). What probably began as a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle parody has long since abandoned anything that would be classified as a point, and that's probably how Willis and Maiellero like it. They probably don't care if you feel the same way either. -D.S.

79. The Green Hornet (2011)

Comic book movies are warped around formulas and origin stories, and in this regard Michel Gondry's The Green Hornet is no different from its peers: Start with a spoiled, entitled man-child, give him bottomless resources, kill off his only living parent and boom, you've got a pretty basic tortured superhero stew simmering. Put all of that in the hands of a more workaday filmmaker and pop out a workaday movie, one that would undoubtedly end up lost among the growing swath of superhero films pushed out into the world back in the early 2010s. But Gondry isn't a workaday filmmaker. He's a misfit genius. His involvement in The Green Hornet is one half of what makes the movie miraculous. The other half is Seth Rogen, who serves as both its writer and star, and Evan Goldberg, who co-wrote alongside Rogen as he did with Pineapple Express and Superbad. These are not the things that most superhero movies are made of, but The Green Hornet isn't most superhero movies. It's its own entity, a disarmingly peculiar movie boosted by Rogen's chemistry with Jay Chou, playing his exasperated sidekick, and by Gondry's refusal to play by the established expectations and rules of the superhero mode. (See full review.) -Andy Crump

78. The Shadow (1994)

Part of the '90s pulp movie train that included The Phantom and The Rocketeer, Russell Mulcahy's The Shadow is the least of the trio, though that's really more a function of setting than anything else. Alec Baldwin's Lamont Cranston comes from the well-established "crime-fighting multi-millionaire" school of do-gooder (that's got to be the best school, right?) and the Shadow's powers to befuddle minds and be invisible make him the bookish, pasty cousin of the high-flying, Nazi-battling Rocketeer or the jungle-to-New York-and-back-again Phantom. Nonetheless, even as the script hobbles the film's otherwise sleek design, Baldwin shows an Alec Guinness-worthy ability to inhabit strange characters and deliver potentially hokey lines with sincerity and charm. (Seriously, check out his turn as The Conductor in 2000's Thomas and the Magic Railroad-the man kills it.) But while that may make the film must-see for all his fans, it's probably not enough to justify anyone else seeing it. -M.B.

77. Batman Forever (1995)

It's difficult to consider Joel Schumacher's initial turn at the helm of the Batman franchise absent an awareness of the hideous film that would come after. All the signs are there-cartoonish flair threatening, scenery-chomping actors where Batman villains should be, bat nipples-but if viewed without remembering this would all lead to Batman and Robin, it's possible to enjoy aspects of the film. Opening mis-en-action, à la Bond movies-here with Batman (Val Kilmer) foiling Two-Face ( Tommy Lee Jones)-Schumacher's film establishes off the bat a sense that this is a day in the life for our caped crusader. Unfortunately, once Jim Carrey's Riddler fully takes the stage, it all dissolves into a mug-off between two of Batman's more important non-Joker adversaries that's in no way true to the actual characters. (Though, granted, Ahnold's turn as Mr. Freeze a few years later was enough to make one long for the subtlety of Carrey's performance.) Still, ultimately, for anyone who has seen Batman and Robin, it's difficult not to suppress a shudder when viewing this particular take on the Dark Knight. -M.B.

76. Blade: Trinity (2004)

Even before 2000's announced the arrival of comic books as a source Hollywoodcould take seriously, there was 1998's Blade, a Marvel character brought to life onscreen by Wesley Snipes, with buckets of blood and cool to spare. And in 2002, the Guillermo del Toro-helmed sequel successfully upped the ante and expanded the world's mythos. Then, in 2004 we got Blade: Trinity, which raised the question: Unholy Blood God, what the hell happened? Reading the hilarious account by Patton Oswalt certainly helps shed some light, but Blade and Blade II writer David Goyer was clearly in way over his head beyond Oswalt's telling in directing this sequel. So many terrible decisions made it all the way to the celluloid-Parker Posey's woefully miscast vampire villainess, the short, trunk-necked Dracula with underbite fangs and played more as a WWE heel (instead of an ancient evil awoken after centuries) by Dominic Purcell, and even Posey's little Pomeranian dog that's actually a Reaper-thing? You know, the super vampires from Blade II that ate vampires like her? It's telling when the best thing in a movie is Ryan Reynolds, landing funny quips that are so tonally jarring to the rest of the film they work almost as a meta commentary on the film itself. -S.W.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
the 100 best superhero movies of all time

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 100 Best Superhero Movies of All Time

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two things quickly become evident when putting together a list of the 100 Best Superhero Movies of All Time. First, this is the Golden Age for such films, a decade where technology, long-unrequited fandom and surging popular awareness have all combined to thrill moviegoers and make Hollywood billions of dollars.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With the recent release of Suicide Squad being panned by critics, it's worth revisiting the old "Marvel vs. DC" question by asking what DC is doing wrong. Reviews for the film, which at the time of writing currently holds a shocking 27% aggregate score on Rotten Tomatoes, all mention the same problems.

Suicide Squad seems to suffer from an identity crisis: an intangible mess of sloppily-written characters who look like they've been kicked through the glass windows of an alternative clothing store; confusingly dragged together in the hopes that somebody - anybody - out there will find them relatable.

And let's not forget the travesty that was Batman v Superman. DC was counting on a win for Suicide Squad, but it seems destined to share the same fate as the former.

Critics can have a detrimental impact on films - look no further than the opening two weeks for Batman vs. Superman. Despite the film setting an Easter-weekend box office record for taking in over $400 million worldwide, the film set a new record for the biggest weekly drop for a big-budget, comic-inspired film: an 81% drop in takings, undoubtedly influenced by the negative reviews surrounding the film. Still, there are other reasons DC is failing to impress in the same way Marvel is, and here are some of them:

Where Did DC Go Wrong with 'Batman v Superman?'

A recurring issue in Batman v Superman is its incoherent structure. Marvel studios has had eight years and 13 movies to explore its universe; DC tried to do that in just one film. Marvel has a coherent and calculated approach to the release of their films. With nine planned film releases yet to come from Marvel, and undoubtedly more in the future, it feels like DC has really felt the pressure to keep up. Unfortunately, they don't seem to have the slightest clue as to what they're doing.

Speak to fans from either side of the Marvel vs. DC debate and they will all have their own reasons as to why some films work and others don't. When Christopher Nolan was brought in to write Batman Begins, he had humanity and realism at the center of his script. The films did well - really well - and the trilogy is a testament to having the right people behind the IP. Nolan made Batman relatable; he knew what he wanted to achieve with the trilogy and stuck with it. It worked.

The Crucial Importance of Relatable Characters

Relatable characters are extremely important, as are their circumstances. Superheroes from both sides of Marvel vs. DC divide have their counterparts: Batman and Iron Man; Deadpool and Deathstroke; Thor and Superman; the list goes on. How we relate to these characters can play a very important part in dictating a film's success. Why would we care about these films if we don't care about, or relate to, the characters in them?

In an interview with MTV in 2015, Samuel L. Jackson stated his own reasons on why people may prefer the Marvel films to DC. "I think Marvel has figured out a way to make those movies accessible to the public that DC hasn't. I don't know what that is. I don't know why you can't get Batman and Superman or people to get as juiced up to be a part of that."

Marvel films also deal with contemporary issues in a way that DC's don't. Marvel's characters and its themes are more grounded in reality, such as the teenage Spiderman struggling with guilt and responsibility or Hulk's moral compass as he struggles to come to terms with his anger. Hulk's problem cannot be solved, it can only be controlled, and that's relatable.

Marvel's characters represent human flaws with their protagonists (and antagonists) striving to accomplish what they believe is the right thing to do. DC's approach isn't as well-executed. Ultimately, DC's protagonists are gods first and humans second. Marvel films have very real issues at their core, and Marvel nailed this with The Amazing Spiderman films over the original trilogy.

Why Money Matters

Of course, finances play a huge part, too. Life-long comic book and film enthusiast, Andy, explained some of the other differences between Marvel and DC films:

"DC/Warner Bros have had a huge shift in creative heads and studio heads wanting this and that, and not having a set place and direction to go. When Marvel was laying down paths and a world building a franchise and a shared universe, DC/WB were leaving it all to Nolan and Batman, which was only meant to be a trilogy. When that ended, they wanted more of the same from a single director's vision. Nolan declined."

After Marvel was acquired by Disney, their money and distribution allowed them to get to a point where they could focus on the material. Disney's acquisition has also allowed them to have a clear and coherent vision for the future of Marvel material. Marvel Studios president Kevin Fiege now reports to Disney studio chief Alan Horn. Previously, Fiege had to report to Marvel Entertainment CEO Isaac Perlmutter. The relationship between the pair was rocky at best, and they have never really seen eye to eye.

Marvel's approach to filmmaking has a direction, and with their increased output allowing them to explore different mediums and genres, it's a strong business model that's unlikely to fail. Marvel now has an entire team dedicated to making the films exploring the universe; DC and Warner Bros simply don't have the time now to keep up, and their attempt at rushing into this shared universe has proved disastrous. Most recently, their attempt at a more light-hearted approach with Suicide Squad seems to have completely missed the mark.

Marvel's Strategic Use of Humor

Marvel is well-known now for injecting humor into their films, which works to expand on the realism we see in their characters. Through the use of humor in their films, and with Marvel being able to explore potentially new genres, their target audience is expanded. Marvel films come across as more family-friendly than DC films: they are accessible and acceptable for younger audiences, whereas the content of DC films is aesthetically much darker.

There are obvious exceptions, like Deadpool, for example, but surely this is proof that Marvel is managing to adapt its characters by catering to specific audiences. It's worth nothing, too, that Marvel's Netflix series, such as Daredevil and the soon-to-be-released Luke Cage, will focus on more adult themes.

Marvel's head start on their explored universe also allows them to bridge material more effectively, and fans are still eagerly anticipating the post-credits scenes at the end of most Marvel releases.

Fans want to see the connections the films are making with the comics. Those subtle little nods in the films, as well as the cross-referencing, make fans feel more at home with their favorite franchises.

DC Needs Some Fresh Ideas, Fast

DC is, unfortunately, consistently missing the mark. Many DC fans simply feel that the films aren't treating the source material with the respect it deserves. An avid DC fan explained why he finds many of the DC films dull, but found the Batman: Arkham trilogy of video games far more appealing than anything he had watched on screen - predominantly due to the writers.

Paul Dini is a man who has been working on the Batman series for over 25 years, and, as such, he knew what he wanted to achieve with the characters. The video games paid particular attention to the lore and motivation of its characters, which is something the films have struggled to achieve.

Let's not forget, though, that Marvel films have missed the mark in the past: the original Captain America and 2003's Daredevil film weren't strong releases. Marvel struggled with the same issues then that DC is struggling with now: namely, not knowing what to do with their characters.

At the moment, though, in the Marvel vs. DC stakes, Marvel is the clear front-runner. DC is running out of ideas and it needs the right team behind them - people with a clear vision - to help push their characters forward, before there's no longer a competition at all.
The views and opinions expressed in this piece are those solely of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the position of Highsnobiety as a whole. Speaking of Marvel, check out why Marvel has a problem with its Asian characters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Marvel vs. DC: Who Makes Better Superhero Films?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With the recent release of Suicide Squad being panned by critics, it's worth revisiting the old "Marvel vs. DC" question by asking what DC is doing wrong.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Across the UK this weekend, crowds of fans will swarm to the first screenings of Avengers: Age of Ultron, the $250m (£165m) sequel that marks the start of this year's summer blockbuster season. But those who feel the market for superhero films has already reached saturation point, be warned: more than 25 are scheduled already over the next four years, as the two age-old comic book rivals, Marvel and DC, slug it out for supremacy.

Avengers, released by Disney-owned Marvel Studios, is at the forefront of the drive. Joss Whedon's film is expected eventually to better its predecessor's worldwide take of $1.5bn and is likely to take $200m on its US opening weekend alone. The movie is the latest in Marvel's "Phase Two", which refers to the second round of interconnected superhero films that also included last year's hit Guardians of the Galaxy, which made more than $770m worldwide.

The final film in this phase will be Ant-Man, released 17 July, which stars Paul Rudd as a character who can shrink in size. Marvel has also unveiled dates for "Phase Three", another nine forthcoming releases, including further outings for Captain America and Thor, taking the company up to 2019.

What other outfit would take an unheard-of comic book like Guardians of the Galaxy and turn it into a box office draw?

David Hughes

"It shows the direction in which Hollywood is going," Matt Mueller, editor of Screen International, said. "They are all talking about ways of expanding their current franchises, rather than looking for more original ways to attract an audience. Studios are so reliant on franchises, and their shareholders are obviously happy they are doing all this. But you wonder if audience fatigue is going to come into play, and whether this is a dangerous game to play in the long term."

Rival DC Comics has eyed Marvel's box-office success with envy and is now hoping to follow up the success of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy with a new set of superhero hits. Working with parent company Warner Bros, DC released Man of Steel in 2013 to a solid $668m at the box office and next year sees the much anticipated clash of the capes in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. A trailer was released this week for the film, which will reboot the Batman story with Ben Affleck taking over the lead role from Christian Bale and Jeremy Irons starring as loyal servant Alfred, previously played by Michael Caine.

But crucially, the film will also act as the springboard for other characters in the DC universe. While Marvel has made successes of lesser-known characters on the big screen, such as Iron Man and Guardians of the Galaxy, DC has struggled to score hits with anyone but their big two: Batman and Superman. Both Wonder Woman, played by Gal Gadot, and Aquaman (Game of Thrones' Jason Momoa) will be introduced in the new film, then receive their own spin-off features. Aside from Batman v Superman, DC has scheduled dates for nine other releases up until 2020, including a reboot of Green Lantern, a character last played by Ryan Reynolds in a disappointing 2011 release.

DC aims to unite its characters in a team film, Justice League, the company's equivalent of the Avengers.

Both firms are aiming at films that will put women in lead parts. Angelina Jolie has been in negotiations to direct Captain Marvel, a film that hopes to buck the trend of unsuccessful female superhero films that includes Supergirl, Catwoman and Elektra. DC has just hired Monster director Patty Jenkins to take on Wonder Woman.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest

Marvel's hit film Guardians Of The Galaxy, 2014. Photograph: AP

They are also looking to widen their ethnic appeal. This summer's Fantastic Four, the Netflix show Luke Cage and Marvel's forthcoming Black Panther all feature African-American actors in lead roles.

David Hughes, author of Comic Book Movies, believes that the industry's renewed obsession with superheroes can be explained by one major factor: competition. "Whenever television threatens film, there's always someone building a bigger mousetrap, to keep people in the cinema," he said. "In the 60s it was Spartacus and Cleopatra, and now, just as streaming looks like it is threatening cinema, we are seeing a massive upswing in 2015. It could well be the biggest year in modern times, with superhero movies contributing massively to that."

But both Marvel and DC are also making content for TV and streaming services to bring their characters to life. Marvel has worked with Disney-owned network ABC on Avengers-linked shows Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D and Agent Carter, which stars British actress Hayley Atwell. A deal with Netflix has also meant an interconnected new set of hero shows, which kicked off last month with Daredevil, a reinvention of the blind crime-fighting character, last played by Ben Affleck in 2003.

Netflix unveiled Daredevil last month. Netflix Photograph: Netflix

Netflix has three other Marvel shows planned and then a miniseries which will bring all the four characters together, mirroring the way that the Avengers were handled on the big screen. There's also a chance that both worlds might collide with Netflix chief content officer Ted Sarandos confirming that there have been discussions about including Netflix characters in Marvel's cinematic universe.

DC's television plan has been notably less connected, with their shows Gotham, Arrow and The Flash existing separately from their theatrical offerings. This was most apparent with the recent casting of a different actor to play The Flash in a forthcoming movie from the one currently playing him on TV. Next up for DC on TV is a new take on Supergirl, who was last seen in a failed big-screen outing in 1984.

The competition between DC and Marvel has ramped up in recent years and, with Marvel in the box-office lead, Hughes believes a lighter tone has won them more fans. "It's the fun factor," he said. "What other outfit would take an unheard-of comic book like Guardians of the Galaxy and turn it into a huge box-office draw? The Marvel movies are fun, they don't make you feel bad, they are worth seeing on the big screen - which is a great thing for cinema in general. The fun was was sorely missing from Man of Steel."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Marvel vs DC: dawn of the superhero blockbuster movie war

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Across the UK this weekend, crowds of fans will swarm to the first screenings of Avengers: Age of Ultron, the $250m (£165m) sequel that marks the start of this year's summer blockbuster season.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Spare a thought for poor James Gunn, heralded director of the Guardians of the Galaxy movies and the not-so-proud owner of a Twitter feed packed with angry Marvel and DC fans slogging it out for geek-culture bragging rights. "Every time I mention anything DC, no matter what, my feed becomes an endless screaming match about BvS [Zack Snyder's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice]," tweeted a fed up Gunn recently," before adding: "You guys are never going to convince each other - it's just a bunch of wasted energy."

For those tired of the fighting, I have good news: a new trailer for Batman v Superman follow-up Justice League suggests this long and painful conflict might finally be entering its endgame. For there can be little point in taking sides when the tonal distinction between Marvel and DC movies has become almost non-existent.

Justice League is ostensibly directed by The Avengers' Joss Whedon, following the departure of Snyder for personal reasons. And the new trailer hints that Whedon, the creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, has imported his trademark crackling inter-superhero badinage straight from Marvel. Our costumed heroes may still deliver furious monologues about the dangers of Ciarán Hinds's nefarious Steppenwolf, but they also wisecrack about the comic minutiae of superhero existence, just as Marvel's heroes do. All we need is for Robert Downey Jr's Iron Man to blast in and the Justice League team might as well be inducted wholesale into the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Batman in Dawn of Justice was the kind of angsty, charmless guy you would cross the road to avoid. But in the new trailer for Justice League he is an absolute hoot. "You're out of your mind," shouts Jason Momoa's Aquaman. "I'm not the one who brought a pitchfork," bats back a deadpan caped crusader.

The only thing missing is a laughter track. We should probably be girding our loins for more gags involving Diana of Themyscira's lasso of truth - as already tested out to decent effect in Patty Jenkins's Wonder Woman - and perhaps the odd joke about Cyborg's suitability as a USB hub for recharging mobile phones.

What's wrong with some good old-fashioned comedy smarts, I hear you ask. And if the alternative is the meat-headed, heavy-metal film-making of Dawn of Justice, then just about any shift in tone is fine. And yet there is a danger that Marvel's blueprint for success has now become so popular that audiences are unable to accept a superhero movie that does not wear its comedy superpowers on both sleeves. To a casual observer not versed in the difference between DC and Marvel's films, Wonder Woman was also tonally indistinguishable from a Marvel episode. Funny and aware of its own ridiculousness but capable of genuine pathos, it made absolute sense to audiences who have been swallowing up these movies since Iron Man first hit cinemas almost a decade ago.

One might argue that last year's Deadpool helped break the mould with its spikily self-reflexive approach. But that shift in tone has also now been absorbed into the studio hive mind, as evidenced by the breathlessly jocular Thor: Ragnarok, a movie so full of thunderous meta-lols that any sense of lasting threat to its heroes is wiped out from the first minute in.

The upshot of this rapidly narrowing blueprint for success is that studios once considered to be languishing in the Marvel machine's rear vision have an opportunity to move out from the pack. Logan, 20th Century Fox's paranoid, postapocalyptic vision of superhero flick as noirish modern-day western, might just have begun that process. And it's encouraging to hear that director James Mangold is now working on a spin-off for Wolverine's clone daughter, Dafne Keen's soulfully unhinged X-23. Next up for the studio is its New Mutants spin-off, by The Fault in Our Stars's director Josh Boone, which also looks different. A new trailer, full of jump-scares and sinister dream sequences, suggests the genre of choice this time out is horror.

The challenge for Fox, and indeed Sony's upcoming Spider-Man spin-offs Venom and Black Cat & Silver Sable, is to continue to find idiosyncratic and eccentric spaces in the superhero rubric. With Marvel and DC occupying the zany, banter-fuelled mainstream, the only room for other studios to make their mark is by exploring darker, more cerebral corners of the genre, where others now fear to tread. The alternative is that the superhero movie becomes one big joke.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Marvel, DC, whatever ... why all superhero movies look the same these days

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pow! DC's Batman packs a comic punch in the new Justice League trailer - but isn't humour Marvel's shtick? Should movie fans look to films from other studios - such as new Wolverine and Spider-Man spin-offs - for fresh heroic twists?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
marvel cinematic universe (fictional universe)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LETS FAIL: Aladdin (Featuring Me!) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrqNqOs4I5sNXZ8sy5EikTQ Check out Brooks Show! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrqNqOs4I5sNXZ8sy5EikTQ Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1815617202/lover-a-film-by-ralph-sepe-jr Rewards include: Pledge $1 or more: +You are able to view all my reviews a week before official release! Pledge $5 or more: +Reviews made exclusively for donators.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Marvel.com | The Official Site for Marvel Movies, Characters, Comics, TV

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Marvel.com is the official site of Marvel Entertainment! Browse official Marvel movies, characters, comics, TV shows, videos, & more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
DCComics.com: Welcome to the Official Site for DC. DC is home to the "World's Greatest Super Heroes," including SUPERMAN, BATMAN, WONDER WOMAN, GREEN LANTERN, THE FLASH, AQUAMAN and more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Difference Ain't What It Used to Be

The Answer-Man is feeling nostalgic

So we are going to dust off a perennial chestnut.

Taking an old one out of the archive which gets asked regularly enough I will dub this one the "2014 Edition of DC vs Marvel" version of this question.

We won't go into the recent Secret Wars, Civil War II and Rebirth shenanigans. I will just do MY overall opinion of the companies.

We are also going to avoid naming names or talking about people engaged in questionable circumstances - See DC Comics. Let's consider this a "within-the-universe specific analysis".

The discussion of the difference between the philosophy of DC's comic creations and Marvel's isn't nearly as wide as it once was. The main difference was in the early approaches to the characters and their perspectives.

Unfortunately, both mythologies have become a bit tarnished and it is more about a profit motive than maintaining their previous ideologies. Since most of the previous creators of those mythologies have died or choose to remain silent, the two groups appear more and more alike as new talents and leaderships take over how the characters, look, behavior and thinking.

I will be looking at them more historically (as a long-time reader) than as a modern comic consumer who may not see any appreciable difference between the two groups. (And they wouldn't be wrong...)

The DC Way

N ational Allied Publications, the original company which would eventually become DC Comics started its hero-making defining its heroes as mythic beings who worked as paragons of Humanity, literally the best of what a Man could be. Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman were all paragons of virtue; strength, will-power or personal fortitude.

Looking at DC, their heroic templates seemed both brighter and more idealistic than Marvel's, possibly because of their origins in times (World War II) that were in desperate need for humor and light.

DC would go so far as to tell outright silly stories during the 50s and 60s, with no need or apparent desire for continuity. It allowed them to create stories not connected to each other, keeping them lighter in tone (and in some cases, really bizarre.)

The companies DC would purchase during Golden and Silver Ages would have similar thematic characteristics. In some cases, they were little more than copies of the core characters of the DC Universe. Characters such as Captain Marvel/Shazam, Captain Atom, were almost direct copies of DC's core character Superman. (Insert lawsuits here...there were many of them.)

Some of the more notable additions included the eclectic Charleston characters of Blue Beetle, The Question, and Shade the Changing Man. My favorites include the Quality Comics, Freedom Fighters who though I saw them too infrequently, I loved them. DC was an excellent judge of characters which fit their overall motif, even if they were less than excellent in the successful deployment of those characters.

DC's Batman shows the indomitable spirit of Man, Wonder Woman shows that peace is desirable but may often have to be fought for. Superman shows the innate goodness of hard work, moderation in all things, restraint and humility even when blessed with phenomenal power. He is a god aspiring for humanity.

Their heroes covered every elemental region and often replicated gods of myth. Aquaman (Posidon), the Flash (Hermes), the Martian Manhunter (Proteus), each of these heroes had mythic counterparts though you may not recognize them immediately.

Even their non-powered heroes were legendary in their abilities, e.g. Green Arrow or Batman both physical specimens whose skills allowed them to hang with the gods as legendary heroes like Hercules and Perseus.

Marvel tried to create very mortal beings who often acquired superheroic capacities, the Fantastic Four being the perfect example. Astronauts, scientists, pilots, stuntmen the F.F. were already some of the best at what they did, so when they were bathed in the cosmic storm which gives them their powers, they simply experienced an apotheosis, an extending of their heroic status into a god-like state.

Marvel further expounds on that god-like state when they have the Mighty Thor (who is believed to be a god) come to Earth to battle the Fantastic Four early in their career.

Though the Fantastic Four are defeated, Thor admits they were far more than mere mortals. This is the evolution of most of Marvel's early character designs, including Daredevil (enhanced senses liked to extraordinary fighting capacity), Luke Cage (superhuman strength and steel hard skin) and Doctor Strange (accomplished surgeon turned Sorcerer Supreme).

Marvel's later heroes were often victims of tragedy or exploitation and were attempting to retake control of their lives. Hawkeye, The Black Widow, The Punisher and Moon Knight are four such human heroes whose lives were filled with both violence and loss.

Tony Stark has translated well to the silver screen as a wise-cracking, know-it-all, ever so technically smart and yet in some ways so socially inept.

Spider-Man for all of his ability still is a young man trying to find himself and adjust to the idea of great power and its inherent responsibility.

The Hulk: a brilliant and mentally tortured scientist, one of the greatest minds of his age, houses within a monster, triggered by that all to common emotion, anger. Unstoppable, uncontrollable, Dr. Banner was the lynchpin of pathos, of men made gods and burned by the fire of their apotheosis.

Each tries to cope with their loss in different ways. Hawkeye hides his emotional trauma under a brash bravado, Natasha Romanov, spy, trained from childhood, was detached from humanity only found herself again as part of the Avengers.

The Punisher launches a crusade against the criminal underworld bring him against heroes and the villains he engages. And Moon Knight? He started his career as a schizophrenic soldier for hire who was later possessed by a sliver of a divine avatar. Marvel experimented with the darker parts of Humanity long before DC considered it a worthy avenue of storytelling.

Marvel also played with the other half of the human equation, the desire for normality. For those beings who were born with capacities that made them more than Human, Humanity is cruel and unforgiving. Two examples of groups seeking acceptance and never finding it are the Inhumans and the mutant (also known as Homo Superior).

The Inhumans, subjects of experimentation from millennia ago, each member was different on the outside than any other member, but they were a warm and loving people (for the most part) extraordinary beings simply wanting what ordinary people wanted, acceptance and respect.

What do I do when I find myself in a position of power and authority?

How do I conduct myself?

How do I lead effectively?

How do I set a good example?

Is this the best I can be?

The X-men and other mutants blessed with superhuman abilities were not revered but reviled, by humanity who feared this embedded potential for change right within their very DNA. Marvel also paid homage to the self-made men such as Hank Pym and Tony Stark whose genius allowed them to supersede their humanity using technology.

Many of DC's heroes can be likened unto gods who have come to Earth (in some cases literally e.g. Superman, who doubles as the Christ or Moses metaphors).

DC's heroes exist to be the exemplars of how great humanity can be when we work together toward common goals and their heroes promote the future of Humanity.

This same mythic nature works against DC when they try to create new heroes who are not as mythic and this may explain why most of their new creations simply never gain the ground their iconic originals did.

I have mentioned this in a number of articles already so I won't beat this horse any more here. When you have the time, check them out here:

The Marvel Way

T imely Publications, the company that would one day become Marvel Comics, approach to hero-making was somewhat different. Where DC showed gods in men's clothing, Marvel wanted to elevate Men (and Women) to a god-like stature. Frail mortals such as Peter Parker and Dr. Banner were suddenly endowed with god-like capacities but with all-too human frailties. Anger, rage, indifference, contempt, mortal weaknesses which gave Marvel's heroes a more human, more understandable every-man quality.

Marvel's most iconic heroes have been consistently able to be related to by a wider audience because their primary issues are very human, seasoned with a superhuman sauce.

Summary

Despite their differences, both companies have successfully managed to tread the ground where most humans find themselves needing guidance and looking to mythology to find the answers.

Comics are a modern mythology who, despite its humble beginnings on low-quality paper with crappy registration, has evolved into a cultural force so economically powerful, it is hard to see what will happen to the industry when the inevitable backlash comes.

Reflection on the Industry as a Whole
I wish there was a better way to describe comic companies who are not DC or Marvel. Alternative makes them sound like they are not as good as the Big Two and that is simply NOT true. Some started humbly and evolved, but today they are just as good in terms of art, design, and story quality.

Lately, it feels as if comics are little more than a loss leader for other forms of media from their parent companies.

With the challenges to keeping comics affordable, the inevitable and inexorable march towards a digital format, creating animated cartoons and producing viable merchandising, it feels to me as if the twilight of this particular genre is written on the wind, primarily due to saturating every potential medium until there is no relief from its incessant superheroic memes and messages.

I think the saddest irony of the mythology of comics is their messages have become less idealistic and more reflective of our society's fears, xenophobia and unreasonable fear in the face of change. Once upon a time comics tried to bring to us ideas of the future of a better, brighter place.

Now like most of our media and maybe like our real world they are filled with the potential for a world where only darkness and destruction seem profitable. What else can explain the orgy of superhero on superhero violence so common in comics today? Superheroes are more inclined to fight each other than they are to fight villains. How else to do explain comic events such as Marvel's Civil War?

Nowadays, profit rules the spirit of both DC and Marvel and if we are looking for light, it will have to come from minds who remember the wonder they felt for the medium, all those years ago.

Another Way to Go

"Alternative Comics" Companies

Good thing, there are plenty of newcomers eager to take up the slack left by the Big Two.

Three of the alternative giants Valiant Entertainment (1989), Image Comics (1992) and Dark Horse Comics (1986) are three of the companies who have managed to hold space at the fringes of the comicsphere for 30+ years, a virtual eternity by comic company standards.
Parts of this essay appeared first on Quora as "How do DC superheroes compare to Marvel superheroes?" © Thaddeus Howze 2016. All Rights Reserved The Answer-Man's Archives are a collection of my articles discussing superheroes and their powers in relationship to their respective universes. We deconstruct characters, memes, profiles and how superheroes relate to real world culture. You can find other Archives on Thaddeus Howze is a writer, essayist, author and professional storyteller for mysterious beings who exist in non-Euclidean realms beyond our understanding.

and the Science Fiction and Fantasy Stack Exchange or at The World According to Superheroes.
These days, they appear to be picking up steam, launching new lines of comics, new heroes and taking advantage of the opening in the renewed interest in comic characters thanks to DC and Marvel's movie mania.

Image Comics and Dark Horse Comics battle for position as the third-biggest comic book publisher. Image is known best for Marvel and DC-style heroes such as Todd McFarlane's Spawn, while Dark Horse mixes alternative comics, like Frank Miller's Sin City, with licensed comics, such as Star Wars.

These three companies and many others such as Vertigo Comics (an imprint of DC Comics) and (bought and eventually absorbed into the DC Universe), Boom! Studios, and IDW Publishingmay be smaller but have have been steadily laying out great stories, amazing artwork and in some cases legendary work, outside of the strictly superhero genre, producing ideas which challenge the literary depth comics can achieve.

Honestly, there are even more comic companies, comic sources, such as web comics, the plucky independents who are trying to make a name for themselves as Timely and National Allied Publications did all those decades ago than you can shake a stick at.

If Marvel and DC who make up approximately 45% and 33% of the industry respectively aren't doing it for you, maybe its time to give other writers, artists and editors a chance to earn your money. If we do this and help improve those smaller companies who are fighting to create great new stuff, we can remind the Big Two they have to earn our money too and not just recycle their histories for a new generation.

When I get caught up I will talk about a number of web comics I have read and enjoyed and if you know of any, feel free to send me your favorites at answerman[dot]archive[at]gmail[dot]com.

Other References

Comics and Quora

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What's the difference: DC vs. Marvel Comics? - Thaddeus Howze - Medium

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
So we are going to dust off a perennial chestnut. Taking an old one out of the archive which gets asked regularly enough I will dub this one the "2014 Edition of DC vs Marvel" version of this question. We won't go into the recent Secret Wars, Civil War II and Rebirth shenanigans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the comics battle between Marvel and DC, which juggernaut comes out on top?

By Christopher Borrelli Tribune reporter
Graphics by Chad Yoder Tribune graphics

Around this time last year during C2E2 -- the busy, sprawling Chicago Comic & Entertainment Expo held each spring at McCormick Place -- we spoke with the heads of DC Comics and Marvel Entertainment. We told them that, because we're curious, we would soon be bringing up an age-old question, a schoolyard tussle without a satisfactory answer.

The question: Which is better, DC or Marvel?

Their eyebrows raised, they chuckled nervously -- or was that condescendingly? See, there may be many comics publishers now -- Image, Dark Horse, IDW -- but DC and Marvel have never loosened their grip on the comic book zeitgeist, the pop cultural ear. Certainly, they're still the two largest exhibitors at this year's C2E2, which begins 11 a.m. Friday. And so, with all of this in mind, we put together a poll of 25 questions and sent it to an assortment of Chicago comic book fans, comic book store owners, artists and writers. And then we waited.

The results, detailed below, were not intended to be definitive. We would not pretend to think we have answered what has been for many, for many decades, an existential conundrum. But it was fun.

Question: Which is better (right now, companywide,books, movies, etc.): DC Comics or Marvel Entertainment?

When did you know one was better than the other?

Marvel: "When Marvel stopped leasing their titles to the highest bidder and started caring about their movies, toys, games, etc." - Earl Geier, artist

Marvel: "That's a funny question. I have always been a Marvel girl. My father instilled the love of Spider-Man in me. But, in all honesty, Marvel right now has put out better movies, better comics, has better characters and seems to care more about their fans than DC does." - Ariel Atkins, First Aid Comics in Hyde Park

Marvel: "2000? X-Men movie? For sure in 2008 with Iron Man movie." - Josh Baker, fan

Marvel: "With my first Conan comic at the ageof 10." - James Nurss, First Aid Comics in Hyde Park

DC: "Batman #1 (New 52) by Scott Snyder." - Paolo Mortel, fan

DC: "Since I was 8 years old. But I largely think your favorite publisher is based on your favorite character." - Jeffery Smith, Chicago Nerd Social Club

DC: "When I first started reading comics, I was all over the place because I was trying to experience it all. After a year of my reading, I focused only on DC books because I liked their heroes and stories better." - Justin Rodriguez, G-Mart Comics

Historically, when were DC and Marvel at their peak (pick a decade)?

Marvel, 1960s: "The '60s belonged to Marvel; Stan Lee re-revolutionized superhero comics with Fantastic Four #1." - Eric Garneau, of The Nerdologues

DC, 1970s: "It was goofy, and I love that." - Joshua Steward, fan

DC, 1980s: "I think we feel those (DC) writers' influence the most right now. Of course, the DEATH of Superman in the '90s had everyone reading comics. I saw kids I never saw reading a book with that." - Kevin Reader, founder of The Nerdologues

DC, 2010s: "Technically, I think DC was really at its peak when it launched the New 52. That move is something that has NEVER happened before -- relaunching an entire line at #1 while simultaneously entering the digital market is a MASSIVE achievement. Marvel attempted to duplicate the feat but totally had to low-ball it in order to not seem like they were copying DC after basically pooh-poohing what DC did." - Terry Gant, Third Coast Comics

Marvel, now: "I think Marvel might be in their peak right this moment, this decade. Their lineup is pretty extraordinary. Bendis, Waid, Ennis, Aaron, Gillen, Gage, Simmonen, Hickman and other creators are doing great things." - Gavin Rehfeldt, Graham Crackers Comics

Who does better with comics?

"Marvel, although not by much. They handle issues of gender/racial inclusiveness slightly better than DC (see: Starfire & Lois Lane). The fact that the X-Men were conceived as a running metaphor for racial prejudice and examining issues of racism and discrimination puts Marvel ahead of DC in examining real world issues through comic book writing." - Michi Trota, Chicago Nerd Social Club

"It's such a matter of taste! Marvel is better with realistic characters and real-world resonance. DC is better with archetypal escapist fantasy and is generally more willing to take big risks." - Matt Fagan, Brainstorm Comics

Who has handled a real-world issue well?

"I really liked the recent Batman issue where a character dealt with gay-bashing and bullying. There was no fanfare, no spectacle, just characters standing up for themselves in the face of bigotry, and it was handled beautifully." Pat Loboyko, artist, G-Mart Comics

What is the best series ever?

Who is your favorite comic book artist ever?

"Best artist ever is Jack Kirby. His mind just had no limits and he had no interest in setting any. Much of the comic book aesthetic we enjoy now is the result of his brain running amok in the '60s."- Alex Wilgus, G-Mart Comics

Who is your favorite comic book writer ever?

"Probably Grant Morrison for the sheer inventiveness of his work. Always challenging, fresh and clever. Even his missteps are fascinating, and I love him for it." - Pat Loboyko

Who does better with movies?

"Christopher Nolan's 'The Dark Knight' is one of my favorite movies ever, but on the whole, Marvel has a stellar plan for building their universe through films that DC could learn a lot from." - Eric Garneau

Who would win in a fight, the DC universe or the Marvel universe?

Marvel: "Wolverine and Deadpool would just keep healing themselves until everyone else was dead."- Mary Ralph, G-Mart Comics

Marvel: "Marvel has a Hulk."- Matt Fagan

Neither: "Oh, puhleeze. I don't ever want to hear that again."- Earl Geier

DC: "Gods are never contested, therefore DC wins."- Anthony Tucciarone, fan

DC: "Thor would give him a good fight, but in the end, DC has Superman. They win hands down."- Eric Garneau

Copyright © 2017, Chicago Tribune

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Which is best: DC or Marvel? In the comics battle between Marvel and DC, which juggernaut comes out on top? By Christopher Borrelli Tribune reporter Graphics by Chad Yoder Tribune graphics Around this time last year during C2E2 -- the busy, sprawling Chicago Comic & Entertainment Expo held each...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By: Mike Foss | March 19, 2015 9:29 am

The stage has been set for the ultimate superheroes and villains Final Four. Thirty-two of Marvel and DC Comics' greatest characters went head-to-head and when the dust settled, these four remained.

Batman was able to use all of his money, business savvy, and pure determination to defeat the Thing, Hulk, and Wolverine to punch his ticket into the final. Now, the Caped Crusader will face his toughest opponent yet: Superman.

No one was able to challenge the Man of Steel in the first three rounds of the tournament. The Kryptonian dispatched Professor X, Wonder Woman, and Spider-Man without hardly breaking a sweat. Now the hero ruined by Bryan Singer will face the hero ruined by Joel Schumacher for the title of most resilient hero in our ultimate bracket.

Let's take a live look at this game already in progress:

On the villains' side of the Final Four we find two stalwarts of ill-repute. The Joker danced over Mystique and Dark Phoenix, before pummeling Lex Luthor in the Metropolis Regional Final in a matchup that many called laughable.

The Crown Prince of Crime will have to go through Magneto if he hopes to reach the championship round of the tournament. The man once known as Max Eisenhardt has easily manipulated his way past every foe he's faced through three rounds. Magneto easily dispatched Black Adam and Ra's Al Ghul, before bending Loki to punch his ticket to the Final Four.

VOTING HAS CLOSED

Voting begins at 9:30 a.m. and concludes at midnight. Who will be the final two in our first installment of Bracket Madness? You decide!

Take Our Poll

Take Our Poll

Come back Friday for the ultimate finale!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The ultimate superheroes and villains bracket: Final Four

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By: Mike Foss | March 19, 2015 9:29 am The stage has been set for the ultimate superheroes and villains Final Four. Thirty-two of Marvel and DC Comics' greatest characters went head-to-head and when the dust settled, these four remained.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Superheroes spend all of their time saving the world, which leaves them with little to address their own issues - even when they seriously need to.

But entertainment website The Credits is helping out superheroes suffering from serious personal problems.

The site enlisted a clinical psychologist, Dr. Natalie Petyke, to blindly analyze a few superheroes based on the recent films in which they appeared, and to suggest treatments.

She was only given summaries of the characters' backgrounds and traumas - she had no clue their stories were pulled straight from fiction. Still, it's a pretty spot-on take.

Can you guess each patient's superhero identity? Find out here.
Illustrations courtesy of The Credits, Ivy Tai; homepage image via iStockphoto, ZoneCreative

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 Superheroes Accurately Analyzed by a Clinical Psychologist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Superheroes spend all of their time saving the world, which leaves them with little to address their own issues - even when they seriously need to. But entertainment website The Credits is helping out superheroes suffering from serious personal problems. The site enlisted a clinical psychologist, Dr. Natalie Petyke, to blindly analyze a few superheroes based on the recent films in which they appeared, and to suggest treatments.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The purpose of this blog is to present and describe fictional superheroes, but what exactly are superheroes? What is the difference between a hero and a superhero? A hero is a man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities, while a superhero is more of an ideal.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Superheroes are in the air, and they're rising. They're leaping tall box-office records in a single weekend. They've gone where no superheroes have gone before, out of suburban basements and into the highest echelons of New York society, providing the theme for Anna Wintour's annual bash at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in May. The *Times'*s A.O. Scott can lament the superhero surge all he wants, but he's among the many reviewers who gave them a stamp of approval, and for good reason: they're simply better movies than they used to be. But why?

The simple answer is that Hollywood is throwing more money at them, and spending it more wisely. "The fact that the fans have so much influence now has made us all raise the bar and convinced studios to take these movies seriously," says Gale Anne Hurd, who produced both Ang Lee's Hulk and this year's The Incredible Hulk. "In the past, they really were considered B movies, but now they are absolutely considered tent poles that are attracting not only A-list casts, but also A-list writers and directors."

The complex answer is that the heroes themselves have become more, well, complex. The films still pit good against evil, but with character actors like Robert Downey Jr. and Heath Ledger taking more risks, good has gotten more ambiguous and evil more unsettling.
Thoughts from Frank Miller, Guillermo del Toro, and Zack Snyder after the jump.
Maybe one reason we can all relate to superheroes in these depressed times is that this year's batch has had to deal with a lot more shit, and it's turned them into assholes. Hancock's a drunk, Tony Stark's a war-profiteer, and Bruce Wayne's a rich jerk. Wouldn't you be messed up if you were fighting, respectively, L.A. crime, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda in clown makeup?

Hellboy's inner demon is that he's an outer demon. O.K., that's not quite as easy to relate to, but he's nonetheless an irritable, cynical hero, and audiences like that. "We are drawn to more ambiguous superheroes," says director Guillermo del Toro, who brought the same cinematic intelligence to Hellboy II that he did to his Academy-tickling, magic-realist masterpiece* Pan's Labyrinth*in 2006. "I think that Brian Singer's Superman proved to be perhaps too good for this world. Too clean."

"When you look back at the time Superman was born, it was portraying, quite essentially, the ethos of the time," del Toro adds. "When you see the recombinant DNA of the superheroes when they were reinvented in the highly dubious 80s, by Alan Moore and Frank Miller, they are virulent testaments to the neo-fascism and consumerism of a sheepish society."

"Frank Miller's Dark Knight[unrelated to the movie but also about Batman] and Moore's *Watchmen-*that's it. That's where it starts," says director Zack Snyder, who helmed the steroidal adaptation of Miller's 300, and is doubling down this fall with the long-awaited film version of Moore's Watchmen. "They humanized these mythical characters. They went where no one else had gone as far as why the characters were broken."

Snyder provides an example of how these characters carry their kryptonite on the inside: "In Watchmen, Night Owl cannot physically get an erection without his suit on. He has issues. That's really a problem."

Frank Miller says the maturation of the superhero has been a long time coming, starting with the emergence of the anti-hero in the 60s and 70s. (Wolverine comes to mind.) "We came into comic books deeply in love with them but wanting comic books that would entertain people our own age. We didn't see people who could fly or people who wore tights as silly.

"The comic book is an American invention. It was only a matter of time that cinema could develop to the point where it could start portraying this kind of fantasy," continues Miller, who was embraced by Hollywood late in his long career thanks to such faithful, frame-for-frame adaptations of his work as Snyder's 300 and, before that, Robert Rodriguez's Sin City. "The amazing new cameras have made the world of the cartoonist come to life." Miller would know-he used them to direct his first feature, The Spirit, based on Will Eisner's 1940s super- noir (coming out on Christmas).

"Every great civilization has its superheroes," says Miller. "America is just a much, much younger civilization... You couldn't find a better version, in America, of the Pantheon of ancient Greece [than superheroes]," which could be why they're such an enduring draw.

Del Toro seconds the point: "There is still a longing for mythos, for a spiritual Pantheon. And in an era where we have enshrined materialism to such a degree and we have killed off every conceit that seems to be weak and based on religion-New Age, all those types of things-the only sort of acceptable mythology, I think, is superhero mythology."

"They are our gods and goddesses," says Snyder.

That may sound like comic-book-nerd hyperbole, but the comparison with Greek mythology is actually relevant, to a point. For one thing, to the ancients, preposterous tales of heroic feats were not to be taken literally. "It's not that they were 'believed,'" says Harvard Classics Professor Gregory Nagy. "That is a Christian concept. Rather, myths about heroes were accepted as valid narratives about moral truths that helped explain life."

But, Nagy says, "although American stories about superheroes share some of the patterns that are typical of ancient Greek myths about heroes"-the hero's trials, for example, or the quest for cosmic balance-"myth was organically tied to ritual in the ancient Greek world, whereas the storytelling about heroes in a modern context has nothing to do with ritual." Unless you count the ritual sacrificing of Sour Patch Kids.

Whether or not they qualify as mythology, superhero movies, thanks largely to this latest slew, have become a bona-fide sub-genre-one that's attracting serious filmmakers to experiment within its structure. Until recently, says del Toro, "there was no shelving space in the culture for superhero movies. You could see Action, Comedy, Melodrama at your DVD store," but no tights-and-cape section. Frank Miller would now place them "probably right next to the noir movies. Between them and the Westerns."

It remains to be seen whether the Age of the Superhero will last beyond the inevitable aftershock of sequels.

"To have Iron Man and Dark Knight in the same summer," says Snyder, "it's gonna be hard to turn Hollywood away from that for a while. They'll be making movies about superheroes you haven't even heard of. They'll be saying, 'O.K., let's dust off this old cat and see if he's a blockbuster.'"

Gale Anne Hurd has been in Hollywood long enough to know that even superhero movies aren't immortal. "Can audiences experience fatigue?" she asks. "Absolutely. I think we saw that with the spate of slasher films," which have been seeing diminishing returns.

Del Toro is slightly more confident: "If I may play the role of Kreskin the magnificent, I would say they're here for a good decade at least, if civilization holds out that long."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Superheroes are in the air, and they're rising. They're leaping tall box-office records in a single weekend. They've gone where no superheroes have gone before, out of suburban basements and into the highest echelons of New York society, providing the theme for Anna Wintour's annual bash at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in May.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A swarm of upcoming superhero films- Captain America, The Avengers, Green Lantern, another Superman reboot, a new Batman epic, blah, blah, yawn-will fill the steroidal void with special effects. Amid this Götterdämmerung of boys with toys, Broadway's Spider-Man fiasco may be the only show with balls.

Up in the sky! It's a bird, it's a plane, it's ... a flocking mess! Gridlock conditions have hit the superhero genre, clogging the metropolitan skies, Imax screens, and creative arteries. Pre-emptive fatigue is the only reasonable reaction to the next slate of doomsday scenarios being death-rayed out of the dream factories-battlefield earth has been saved so often from evil-baddie destruction and criminal anarchy that it's a wonder the planet doesn't look like a spat-out peach pit by now. How far can Hollywood rummage through the costume bin before the only thing left is Wonder Woman's training bra? Earlier this year came the clamor of The Green Hornet, a 3-D exercise in retro chic which certified that Seth Rogen's hip brand of smoked ham is as under-amped for crime-busting action as James Franco's was for Oscar hosting duties. This runaway lawn mower was directed by Michel Gondry (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), who probably told himself that dusting off a pop icon would make for a stylish romp, the sort of thing you tell yourself before falling from the trapeze. In the coming months and near-distant future, the thundering clouds will belch forth Thor, the tale of the hammer-whirling Norse god with the golden tresses and a lungful of "By Odin's beard!" exclamations (the director is Kenneth Branagh, whose Shakespearean background well equips him to handle shouty dialogue in windy conditions); X-Men: First Class (directed by Matthew Vaughn), a prequel set during the high noon of the Cuban missile crisis, whose cast includes January Jones as a mutant who can transform herself into a diamond figure, which seems redundant; Captain America: The First Avenger, based on the hero who was created in 1941 by Jack Kirby and Joe Simon; and The Avengers-with Robert Downey Jr.'s Iron Man, Chris Evans's Captain America, Chris Hemsworth's Thor, and, so that it isn't all pecs up there, Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow. A new Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield) will be web-slinging from building to building next year, Iron Man 3 is set for 2013, Mayan apocalypse permitting, and there's talk of an Ant-Man movie to be directed by Edgar Wright, whose Scott Pilgrim vs. the World had fanboys and film bloggers doing a Snoopy dance of delight. This could be a dicier proposition, however. Ant-Man, with his antenna'd helmet, was never someone that comic-book diehards considered a heavy slugger. Saturday Night Live scholars will recall that it was Ant-Man who was ragged on at the superheroes cocktail party by Dan Aykroyd's Flash and John Belushi's Hulk for his puny powers. "Ant-Man, huh? Where are your ants?" "They're at home, in the ant farm."

<a href="/hollywood/features/2002/03/wolcott-200203">* The constant reincarnation of Superman (James Wolcott, March 2002) <a href="/culture/features/1986/09/dark-knight-198609">* Batman: The Dark Knight-comics go film noir (James Wolcott, September 1986) The above roll call represents only the Marvel Universe. The DC Universe is soon to beam forth Green Lantern, in which Ryan Reynolds wears the emerald ring of power and seeks redemption for having co-starred with Sandra Bullock in The Proposal; another reboot of Superman, with, in a fine casting irony, British dreamsicle Henry Cavill as Krypton's undocumented alien fighting for truth, justice, and the American way; and another Batman epic directed by Christopher Nolan, because there will always be another Batman epic, each one soul-kissing the existential abyss a little deeper. As the Caped Crusader, Christian Bale, that prodigious package of cheekbones and charmless intensity, is the perfect avatar for post-9/11 melodrama: Antonin Artaud in cowl and scowl, expiating the world's sins.

For old-school comic fans such as myself (who had a letter published in the Stan Lee-Jack Kirby Fantastic Four in 1967-top that, Jonathan Franzen), these cinematic blowup editions are lacking on the fun side. The more ambitious ones aren't meant to be much fun, apart from a finely crafted quip surgically inserted here and there to defuse the tension of everybody standing around butt-clenched and battle-ready, waiting for some laureled thespian (Anthony Hopkins as Odin in Thor) to elocute and class up this clambake. Even the films that play it loosey-goosier, such as the facetious Ghost Rider (Nicolas Cage as a skull-blazing vigilante who chills by listening to the Carpenters), end up laying it on too heavy, faking orgasm like a porn star trying to keep Charlie Sheen's attention. For all of the tremendous talent involved and the technical ingenuity deployed, superhero movies go at us like death metal: loud, anthemic, convoluted, technocratic, agonistic, fireball-blossoming, scenery-crushing workloads that waterboard the audience with digital effects, World War IV weaponry, rampant destruction, and electrical-flash editing. Like the James Bond revivals with Daniel Craig, they're endurance tests with obstacle-course stuntwork and a black-piano gloss. Too much money is riding on each start-up or franchise installment to accommodate the air cushion that buoyed the romantic wonder of Christopher Reeve-Margot Kidder flights in Superman, the ironies of Gene Hackman as shiny-scalped evildoer Lex Luthor, scoring laughs with one layup sarcasm after another. The arousing sexuality of Ornella Muti slinking around in a catsuit in Flash Gordon (1980) was answered by Michelle Pfeiffer's full-bodied meow as Catwoman in Batman Returns (1992), but since then it's been mostly toys for boys on a Gtterdämmerung scale. It's as if the superhero genre went all-in with steroids, which bulk the muscles and ramp up the aggro but shrink the dangly bits, making them easier to sausage into the Speedos of freedom.

Why so much overcompensation? The superhero genre is an American creation, like jazz and stripper poles, exemplifying American ideals, American know-how, and American might, a mating of magical thinking and the right stuff. But in the new millennium no amount of nationally puffing ourselves up can disguise the entropy and molt. Despite the resolute jaw of Mitt Romney and John Bolton's mustache, American exceptionalism no longer commands the eagle wingspan to engirdle the world and keep raising the flag over Iwo Jima. Since Vietnam, whatever the bravery and sacrifice of those in uniform, America's superpower might hasn't been up to much worthy of chest-swelling, chain-snapping pride (invading a third-rate military matchstick house such as Iraq is hardly the stuff of Homeric legend), and our national sense of inviolability took a sucker punch on September 11, 2001, that dislocated our inner gyroscope. Sinister arch-villains make for high-stakes showdowns, but asymmetrical conflict has no need for them, and for all we know the cavern voice of Osama bin Laden could be a Mission: Impossible tape, poofing into smoke at the first shaft of sunlight. The subsequent War on Terror is one waged within a shadow maze of misdirection and paranoia where the enemy might be no more than a phantom army of apprehensions, viral bugs invading the neural network. The movie that mirrors this post-millennial letdown isn't a movie at all, but Julie Taymor's Broadway musical Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark, savaged and mocked for months by just about everyone with Internet access or a tin can connected to Michael Riedel at the New York Post. It was an imperfect effort, to understate matters madly. Act I can't get out of its own way, but Act II was a discordantly compelling mélange of postmodern media theory and Jungian psychology, of Guy DeBord's Society of the Spectacle and the Buddhist tales of Mara (who unthrones reason and serenity with frightful phantasms). The reign of terror that rocked the skyscraper city was nothing more than demonic images projected by the Jumbotrons of mass illusion, a scarifying paroxysm of pixels like the nerves thrown in patterns on a screen in T. S. Eliot's "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock." Spidey's nemeses strutting down the runway weren't real super-baddies but holograms woven from imagination, our worst foes being manufactured fears. The haphazard storytelling of Spider-Man the musical muddled Taymor's vision-idea, but at least there was an idea here to muddle, which is more than most superhero movies have. It beats hanging around the ant farm.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Superhero Movies: Turn Off the Projector

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A swarm of upcoming superhero films-Captain America, The Avengers, Green Lantern, another Superman reboot, a new Batman epic, blah, blah, yawn-will fill the steroidal void with special effects. Amid this Götterdämmerung of boys with toys, Broadway's Spider-Man fiasco may be the only show with balls.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last month may have seen the surprisingly huge box-office success of , but that doesn't mean we're about to enter an era of superhero-movie outliers. Deadpool broke ranks from standard comic-book storytelling to delight audiences and critics, but in its wake we're getting a flood of copycat stories from our most recognizable superheroes, most of them offering sequels or franchise expansions intended to keep the whole thing going for another decade-plus.

This goes well beyond the old superficial complaint that all comic-book stories are the same. Justice finally dawned as Batman and Superman duked it out, but in just over a month we'll face yet another clash of comic-book titans in Captain America: Civil War.

When Deadpool scored big at the box office, Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn praised its originality. Spectacle films, he said, "need to be unique and true voices of the filmmakers behind them. They can't just be copying what came before them." (Gunn also said that Deadpool wouldn't have been greenlit were it not for the success of Guardians, but presumably he considers that inspiration not imitation.) But the box-office success of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, which aims to build the same sweeping cinematic universe that made Marvel, suggests that the biggest superhero franchises will continue to follow each other's moves closely-and even smaller players will be getting in on the same game. Much has been made of the difference in tone between Marvel and Warner Bros., but when you take a step back, the superhero landscape looks awfully similar across all studios and platforms. Here's why you keep getting that sense of déjà vu.

Hero vs. Hero

The most easily identifiable trend in superhero film and television is heroes squaring off against heroes. In the case of Marvel's and DC's biggest offerings, it's right there in the title. On the TV side, we have Daredevil squaring off against Punisher in Season 2 of the Netflix series. The X-Men have been doing it for years; Michael Fassbender's Magneto and Jennifer Lawrence's Mystique have vacillated between friend and foe depending on how the wind was blowing, and in May's Apocalypse even a traditional hero like Storm will be brainwashed into working against Professor X and his gifted students.

Sure, superhero matchups are an old comic-book tradition, and CW shows had Flash vs. Arrow almost as soon as they had a Flash and an Arrow. But in the case of Marvel's and DC's big showdowns, there's an added layer of competition in play. Batman v Superman was announced way back in July 2013 as, many believe, a reaction to the slightly underwhelming performance of Man of Steel and Warner Bros.' attempt to quickly jumpstart a cross-over-friendly shared universe that could compete with the one Marvel took years and four films to build. In October 2014, Marvel announced its own bigger marquee fight: a showdown between Cap, Iron Man, and their respective teams.

So is this all part of an escalating arms race between the two biggest superhero studios? Yes and no. It's impossible for Marvel and Warner Bros. to deny that they're keeping a wary eye on each other. Remember, they jockeyed over the same May 6, 2016, release date before Warner Bros. blinked and retreated to March.

But there's a larger storytelling advantage here. One of the problems plaguing the otherwise hugely successful Marvel Cinematic Universe is the villain issue. Fantastic actors playing bad guys buried under layers of latex-think Christopher Eccleston in Thor: The Dark World, Lee Pace in Guardians of the Galaxy, Hugo Weaving in the first Captain America-are often the weakest links of any of these films. Iron Man 2 faltered by bringing in too many villains (did we learn nothing from Spider-Man 3?) and not even the combined talents of James Spader and Joss Whedon could make Ultron work. Heroes work best when they're flawed creatures who skate the edge of good and evil. That's why X-Men: First Class works so well, why Robert Redford in Winter Soldier was such a hit, and why Marvel's best villain is Tom Hiddleston's Loki.

So putting recognizable and sympathetic characters like Batman, Superman, Iron Man, Cap, Punisher, Storm, etc. in the antagonist seat makes, in theory, for a meatier, morally complex showdown. It also gives these franchises added brand recognition and saves them the trouble of introducing new villains. Doomsday ( Michael Shannon, sorta) and Baron Zemo ( Daniel Brühl), for example, are the real big bads of Batman v Superman and Civil War, but, if they don't want to, audiences don't really have to care about them at all. We have yet to see how the lighter X-Men and Marvel Cinematic Universes pull these heroic showdowns off (and X-Men: Apocalypse has its own fantastic actor buried under layers of latex to contend with), but the Daredevil and Batman v Superman approaches have thus far yielded a lot of punishing brutality that hasn't always landed with audiences.

Fatal Femmes

Even as the testosterone-fueled showdowns escalate between superheroes, new and enticing female fighters have been stealing the show. Your mileage may vary on Élodie Yung's Elektra-some fanboys miss that revealing costume from the comics-but for many she was the highlight of Season 2. Vox praises how she "slinks off with the entire second half of *Daredevil'*s second season" and "provides a brightness and bite to the show," while elsewhere she's credited for breathing "some life into a story that's so dark and violent is can be hard to take."

The praise for Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman has been even more unanimous. Even as harsh reviews for Batman v Superman came rolling in, critics reserved raves for Gadot's-admittedly limited-screen time. The Guardian called her the "best thing in the movie," said that "we only get enough Wonder Woman to leave us wanting more," and the Wrap said it was only Diana who "injects some real vitality into the sludgy, superhero sameness."

It's that last quote that might hold the key to Elektra's and Wonder Woman's popularity. Good guys and bad guys pummeling each other? We've been there, done that. But the comic-book-viewing audience is increasingly thirsty for something new. TV shows like the pitch-black Jessica Jones and the light-hearted Supergirl and Agent Carter have all given us decent tastes of female comic-book leads, but both Yung and Gadot balanced the light and the dark of their characters in a delightfully complex way. (Once again, Gadot had very little time to do so, but was aided by 75 years of expectation.) It's that kind of complex female representation that has made Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow so popular. (Is it a coincidence that the Natasha-heavy Captain America: Winter Soldier pops up at the top of most Marvel movie rankings?)

So even as Batman v Superman got mixed reviews, people are excited for Gal Gadot's upcoming Wonder Woman film. Jennifer Lawrence's Mystique and Sophie Turner's Jean Grey are a huge part of Apocalypse's marketing. And though it's Jon Bernthal's Punisher who is likely to land a spin-off, a series starring scene-stealer Yung might be the wiser course if Netflix wants to keep its Defenders franchise fresh.

The Deadpool Effect

We have yet to see the full ramifications of *Deadpool'*s astronomical box-office success-it's now the highest-grossing R-rated movie of all time at the worldwide box office-but its influence on the comic-book movie world has already been felt. Just 11 days after Twentieth Century Fox's *Deadpool'*s splashy debut, Warner Bros. announced that a special R-rated cut of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice would be available on Blu-ray, and Fox floated the idea that Wolverine 3 could also get an R-rating. Deadpool has sparked a conversation about whom these comic-book movies are for: you can call them juvenile if you prefer, but you can't say they're just for kids.

More to the point, the speed with which these announcements followed *Deadpool'*s success shows how closely these comic-book studios are watching and learning from each other. Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn did say that his wish was that Deadpool would usher in more individuality in the realm of comic-book films. But Zack Snyder, king of the grimdark, is already promising that his Justice League film will be "more comedic," thanks to Ezra Miller's Flash. Sounds like the Deadpool effect to me.

The Ultimate Sacrifice

This is your last chance to avoid a major spoiler from Batman v Superman. If you want to keep the mystery alive, here is where you get off. In Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Zack Snyder took Man of Steel's rampant Jesus imagery to its natural conclusion. Clark Kent died for our sins on the blunt end of a Kryptonite spear. He won't be gone for long. The movie's ending already hinted at his return, and what's a Justice League franchise without our favorite Kryptonian? But there are rumors that a similar impermanent sacrifice from a Boy Scout in blue and red may be coming in Captain America: Civil War. And these big tragic deaths followed quickly by resurrection are blowing the stakes of these comic-book universes. As The Hollywood Reporter put it in regard to Superman: "How can you create narrative tension when your hero has survived both a nuclear explosion and death itself?"

It's not just the headliners who are death-proof. Marvel decided to undercut Joss Whedon's favorite storytelling trick-the tragic death of a cuddly character-in order to resurrect Agent Coulson for Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. And while I appreciate that Daredevil didn't try to fake us out with Elektra's death, her resurrection means we had yet another sacrifice that didn't require any actual sacrifice.

There may yet be a permanent death on the horizon for comic-book movies. The contracts are up on the original stars of X-Men: First Class and Jennifer Lawrence's has been very clear that she won't be back for a fourth installment. Will a tragic end for Mystique help make Apocalypse a serious threat? Maybe. Then again, the X-Men franchise already has a bad track record when it comes to making deaths stick, and a shape-shifter like Mystique could easily be played by a different actress.

Reboots and resurrections are part and parcel of the comic-book world; always have been. When stories stretch across decades, the traditional story arcs need to bend to accommodate. Inconsequential villains come and go, but on the page, our heroes are supposed to endure. But as superhero film franchises break new ground stretching beyond traditional trilogies into shared universes with multiple phases, they're starting to bump up against the limits of film. Marvel promises that its building toward Thanos and a massive war. But what's a war, really, without any lasting casualties?

Get Vanity Fair's HWD Newsletter

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Are All the Superhero Stories the Same Now?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last month may have seen the surprisingly huge box-office success of , but that doesn't mean we're about to enter an era of superhero-movie outliers. Deadpool broke ranks from standard comic-book storytelling to delight audiences and critics, but in its wake we're getting a flood of copycat stories from our most recognizable superheroes, most of them offering sequels or franchise expansions intended to keep the whole thing going for another decade-plus.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On a rooftop in New York, a man in a blue rubber suit stands with his hands on his hips, his pelvis cocked jauntily forward, proudly looking out over the city. His city. He is saying-no, proclaiming-that he is a tool of destiny, determined to protect his town from evildoers in whatever form they may take: "It's not supposed to be easy; it's not supposed to be comfortable. It's supposed to be dangerous and interesting. That's the hero's journey. That's why they get up in the morning, to go mano-a- monomyth with the darkness. To win the elixir and save the world."

This gobbledygook could easily be a closing monologue from a Marvel Netflix series-the self-serious Daredevil, especially-or something that Ben Affleck would intone while sweating in the Lycra clutch of the Batsuit. We are saturated with superheroes these days; geek culture is mainstream culture, and almost literally the only spectacle Hollywood can give us. A trip to the multiplex or a trip on your small screen, from ABC to the CW to Amazon, is a journey through existing I.P., Marvel battling DC in a mano-a-mano battle to the death-and every potential franchise possibility is being squeezed from the nearly hundred-year history of superhero literature. Even a girl with the powers of a squirrel (you know: a bushy tail, powerful buck teeth, and "squirrel agility") is in the mix to get her own Marvel movie, if Anna Kendrick's wishes come true.

Superheroes, the lot of them, need someone to poke fun at their tropes and clichés, and that's where Amazon's new comedy pilot, The Tick-and said monologue-comes in. It's a reboot of a 30-year-old, cult comic-book series that's died and risen again more times than Buffy the Vampire Slayer. A generation has been lucky enough to grow up with it: in the 90s, The Tick was a cartoon series that lived on in Comedy Central reruns, and in 2001, a short-lived live-action version with a perfectly cast Patrick Warburton made its debut. This newest iteration of The Tick is markedly less cartoony than the previous one, and it's also a bit of a Trojan horse.

But according to creator Ben Edlund, the most important part remains: "It's still dumb, which is important." As he explained in a phone call, "It's the product of totally earnest idiots who think it's just awesome, and there isn't a single punch line in there. They're showing only the things you need to see to have the most poignant, lyrical experience, but they're just wrong."

This Amazon pilot still has a "weird, dark, epic scope," said Edlund, who speaks in italics and capital letters, his booming voice sounding just a little bit like the Tick himself. The hero's headspace is a direct response to the seriousness of late 20th-century superhero comics, in which characters like Daredevil fought ninjas and growled about "My city!" The Tick takes that pomposity to another, more absurdist level, as he's "an orator who lost his podium and is just shooting off at the mouth the whole time."

Our story starts with Arthur (newcomer Griffin Newman), a pencil-pushing accountant on psych meds who's convinced that the evil superhero who ruined his life-long rumored to be dead-is actually alive. Arthur's on a mission to find that super-villain and uncover the conspiracy (a mission that has the world thinking he's insane)-but in doing so, he meets the Tick ( Peter Serafinowicz, a British comedian with a cultish career), a weirdo big, blue bug with constantly moving antennae who speaks in absurdist edicts and decrees about his favorite subject: destiny, with drama coming in a close second.

Arthur and the Tick are a superhero Don Quixote and Sancho Panza; that classic comic frisson is essential to the Tick's appeal. It's a portrait of genuine human lameness, similar to what Edlund has written in the past: "I was obsessed about trying to bring the banal and mundane aspects of life into more excruciating contact with the heroes. They seldom have a problem paying for a cab, or an issue getting into their apartment and they can't find the right key. That would interrupt the flow of this almost operatic creature. It's the job of superheroic literature in general to kind of swoon with it and get the audience behind the hypnotic spell. That's not our job. Our job is to have fun with it."

Edlund was a 17-year-old Dungeons and Dragons player from Pembroke, Massachusetts, when he first drew The Tick for the New England Comics newsletter. The hero's first issue came out when Edlund was 19. He wrote the series in fits and starts and, in the wake of the success of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, sold the cartoon adaptation to Fox in 1992, which gave him a start in writing and producing for film and television.

In a meeting of like minds and geek synergy, he worked on Joss Whedon shows ( Firefly, Angel), a DC superhero show ( Gotham), and, most significantly, seven years of the deathless CW genre show Supernatural, which he described as "breaking through that genre ceiling, certainly [the] American genre-we can argue about [the longevity of] Doctor Who, but it's like peat moss." The episodes he wrote were notable for their whimsical chaos, particularly the Season 6 meta-on-meta episode "The French Mistake," in which monster-hunting brothers Dean and Sam find themselves in a parallel universe where they discover that Supernatural is actually a TV show, then pal around with actors Jensen Ackles and Jared Padalecki, playing the roles of Dean and Sam. (Whew.)

When this Amazon iteration of The Tick was originally announced in late 2014, it seemed as if it would be another variation on the previous Fox 2001 live-action version-once again starring Patrick Warburton, whose booming voice and Ken-doll physique seemed to embody the Tick. Yet during the two-year development process, a decision was made to have it be "radically, in every way, a new thing," which meant searching for a new actor to play the Tick. However, Edlund is certain that "Patrick is going to be really valuable to this universe," and it's possible that his particular basso profundo will be employed at some point. (Warburton remained a producer on the project, and he supports Serafinowicz's casting; as he told Vanity Fair in an e-mail: " The Tick will live forever, and long after Ben, Peter, and myself have gone the way of the potato (yes, even potatoes die), there will be new Ticks. I know Peter knows and appreciates this responsibility." ) As Edlund said, writing and working on this particular property for Amazon is a different skill than writing for commercial television: "They genuinely do not want to do things because they worked before. They don't want to stick to the rote structures."

The Tick is meant to be a spoof; its pilot, Edlund points out, is literally titled "The Tick (A Parody)." That gives him license to play with superhero tropes across different universes. "You get to inherit all the forms of the superhero universe if you laugh," he says. "It'd be theft, but I'm laughing!"

Yet some ideas don't pass legal. A superhero team originally called "Freedom Five" happened to echo an obscure Marvel superhero team that appeared in a couple of comics, so Edlund renamed his team the "Flag Five." The new name, he says, is "the lamest possible version. Now it's the Flag Five, because they're very patriotic." He riffed a little on how the Flag Five got their name, hypothetically: "[It's] because everyone had a name they loved, but no one would give in, so they had to vote and they settled on the name everyone hates."

In some ways, Edlund's experience with the Tick universe shares similarities with J.K. Rowling's constant fiddling with the world of Harry Potter. Except in Edlund's case, " The Tick is more in fits and starts, and it's fragmentary. And that's exactly like me." The Tick would get along wonderfully with today's modern heroes, like Daredevil, Edlund added. "He's very serious about destiny, and it's the rhetoric of these other shows." But compared to the march of superhero product these days, the Tick is in a different business. "All the other ones are so scared of looking stupid. There's a certain kind of guilt associated with having [these] not-fun, strange, overwrought misadventures. Instead of laughing, they feel like they should just have a shitty time. Adult it up." The Tick, however, walks a tightrope of being "serious about our dramatic pretensions, but also being completely dumb-ass."

It's a formula that's worked ever since a teenage Edlund wanted to make fun of Daredevil, and well, there's something amazing about the fact that it's lasted for 30 years. I own the first 12 Tick comics, and before I talked to Edlund, I pulled an issue out from my bookcase. It was Issue #3, "Night of a Million-Zillion Ninja," from 1988, where a faux Electra and the Tick take on NINJA-whose "history and heritage" you can find in "a typical Polynesian restaurant." (Edlund's author's note, in this case, also admits: "I still have a lot of growing to do as an artist and a writer.")

What's funny, however, is that in the issue's "Tick Talk" question-and-answer session, Edlund answers a Q&A riffing on what's going to happen to the Tick in the near future. He imagines 1,001 issues, with New England Comics going bankrupt on Tick #1000, which was sent to "every household in America." Number 1001, issued in 2014, would be "extremely rare," with only 100 copies worth $60,000 to $90,000 apiece. Edlund laughs, heartily, when I mention this, saying that "we were just fooling around"-but it was a "bold premonition." What's really funny, though, is that this prediction sort of came true. The spirit of that teenage goofing around survives; 30 years later, Edlund is still working on The Tick. And in the age of superhero anxiety, the big, blue hero is a necessary corrective: a guy who can both save the world and crack a legitimately funny joke at the same time.

Get Vanity Fair's HWD Newsletter

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On a rooftop in New York, a man in a blue rubber suit stands with his hands on his hips, his pelvis cocked jauntily forward, proudly looking out over the city. His city.