Now, I hate it when some wannabe screenwriter goes on imdb.com or something and talks about how DC's wrong about just about everything. They're not. They're really not. For all of the relaunch's flaws, they managed to put out some new comics, and boost sales by quite a bit. I'm not interested in whether or not they got enough new female readers, and I don't think the "not enough casuals" problem will be solved until they get comics back on the shelves of non-specialty stores and tell more self-contained stories.That's where Earth-One comes in, that's why I created the image above, and that's something I'll get to later.
But I think that whatever people want to harp on DC Comics for, or how much they deserve a zealous defense; one historic mistake put them in a world of trouble and I think they're just starting to see the error of their ways. That mistake: turning Batman and Superman--the two most famous superheroes of all--against each-other.
Between 1951 and 1983, Superman and Batman teamed up frequently. Sure they had a few fights (usually because of some off-beat silver age plot), but they were usually depicted as good friends with a mutual admiration. That started to change during a story in which Batman needed to save Lucius Fox from some terrorist in another country and due to whatever plot contrivance, the Justice League refused to help him, so Batman quit and formed the Outsiders.
I don't believe that automatically lead to becoming sworn enemies or something, but it was kind-of the beginning. This was definitely a different time for DC. Superman was DC's undisputed #1 hero. Batman and Wonder Woman were fairly equal candidates for #2, each with a live-action TV series under their belt; but Superman had two blockbuster movies to his name, with a third on the way. On the Super Friends/Super Powers animated series, Superman was seen as more-or-less the leader, though Wonder Woman and Batman usually got more screen time. Even the 1950s The Adventures of Superman was still in syndicated reruns. It may have been showing its age, but the controversy over the death of George Reeves was still a hot topic.
Sales of the "big three's" comics may have been low compared to Marvel as well as DC's own New Teen Titans and Legion of Super Heroes (interestingly, these were both books with young casts that had connections with older heroes) but everybody knew who they were, and Superman was the big gun. There were, however, some at DC, such as President Jannette Kahn (which I believe was revealed in a panel which can be found at www.thecomicbooks.com), and Vice President/Executive Editor Dick Giordano (as eluded to in a TwoMorrows book about the artist/editor), who were bigger fans of Batman. They respected Superman, of course, but they were certainly rooting for the underdog. It's easy to see why they'd want to put more emphasis on a character who--at the time--was best known for a TV show that was making fun of him.
By the middle of the decade, however, things were changing. Superman III was a critical and commercial disappointment, with Supergirl failing at the box office. Meanwhile, a young comics enthusiast named Michael Uslan had teamed up with producer Benjamin Melniker to license Batman and they were nearing a distribution deal with Universal when Warners decided they'd rather produce the film themselves (with the two being credited as Executive Producers) and thus DC began putting more emphasis on Batman.
Before that, however, DC Comics decided to unleash a 12-part "maxi-series" called Crisis on Infinite Earths which was intended to clear up continuity snarls and the "confusion" of having parallel dimensions that were home to different versions of given characters. The series may not have accomplished these goals, but it gave them an opportunity to reboot many of their classic characters, with Superman and Batman each getting a saga devoted to their revised origin. Man of Steel #3 established that, in the new continuity, Superman and Batman were not friends and disapproved of each-others' "methods."
This was, of course, rather overblown, but that same year, the famed Dark Knight Returns--a story which took place in an alternate DAAAAARRRRRK future--was released. This was seen by some as the return of the "dark" Batman, and certainly portrayed him as an anti-hero. In the book, Superman had become a pawn for the government and the climax of the miniseries gave us a battle between the two that has become legendary. From that point forward, DC was sending out a message: these two are not friends.
Meanwhile, Superman IV flopped. Hard. This was a result of Warners allowing Ilya Salkind to sell the rights to the book to the infamous Canon productions who basically released the film unfinished. Warners gave them $40-million, and they spent $27-million on other projects (sadly, I'm blanking on the source). The film would go on to gross only $17-million at the box office. The following year marked the character's 50th anniversary with a flow of merchandise and Adventures of Superman marathons, along with two new TV incarnations: Superboy and Ruby Spears' animated series; however, it seemed like the Superman-mania from a decade ago, was gone. By this time, Warners had bought back the movie rights to Batman. They were glad they did.
In the Summer of 1989, no film could touch Batman and it seemed like the character was everywhere. You could not walk down the street without seeing guys from eight to eighty in black Batman t-shirts and baseball caps. There were action figures, video games, and a graphic novel adaptation featuring some of Jerry Ordway's finest artwork. If Superman's "big five-oh" was about nostalgia, Batman's was about rebirth.
If the first three years of the 1990s were a rough time for Superman, some of that blame has to go to Bat-mania. While the idea that they were "best friends" was a thing of the past, DC had portrayed the pair as a duo who shared a mutual respect rather than a contrived animosity, then perhaps Superman would have more of a leg to stand on. However, this wasn't the only thing in Superman's way. By 1992, the Dark Age was in full-swing, and Batman was riding high with a second movie in theaters and an animated series on TV. Superman was dead.
Literally.
While some people have tried to portray the death & return of Superman as some sort of low-point in the character's life, it's really this story which has kept the character alive. Those who read it could see that Superman could be challenged and was willing to lay down his life for others. When the character returned with the Reign of the Supermen saga--the genuine suspense of which was, admittedly, hurt by the ending which was a cheat--sales improved. Superman may not have been back on top, exactly, but he was able to compete again with respectable sales and a revived fanbase.
Not long after, a similar story wherein Batman's back was broken and he was "replaced" by a more violent successor surfaced. It wasn't nearly the cultural touchstone Superman's death & return was, but it did send waves throughout the industry. However, it may have been too much like Reign of the Supermen in that his replacement was a violent killer and Batman had to bring him down. This cut into the image of Batman as the merciless anti-hero he was supposed to be seen as, and made the rift between he and Superman seem even more pointless.
Speaking of this rift, a year after Superman's new animated series premiered--from the people who brought you Batman: the Animated Series--the inevitable team-up occurred and it epitomized the inherent flaws in portraying them as adversaries. Superman confronted Batman for simply manhandling a crook and was reluctant to tear down a wall on Luthor's compound rather than use his X-ray vision. However, he had no problems earlier in the episode with tearing the door off of Air Force 1 in mid-air and punching a hijacker in the face. Not only that, but a subsequent team-up later in the series, saw Batman criticizing Superman saying, "I should have counted on you to burst in with both arms swinging." It was clear that DC didn't even know why the two were fighting.
By that time, however, the comics seemed to have put it on the back-burner. When DC revived the classic JLA lineup in 1996, Batman was certainly given a surly personality; but that was outdone by that of a revised Aquaman. Meanwhile, much of the tension and conflict centered around the younger versions of Flash and Green Lantern (think Iceman and Goose but with super speed and a power ring) which filled the team.
During this time, however, DC got smart and began dealing with Superman and Batman as friends. After-all, it had been established early on that Superman at-least trusted Batman enough to give him Luthor's Kryptonite ring. The two started appearing in each-others' adventures more, and facing off against each-others' signature foes more--Superman battled the Joker here, Batman took on Luthor there--as part of an effort to integrate the DC Universe as a whole. They eventually even got their own series together--Superman/Batman--and joined forces in animation once more in Justice League.
The reason I depicted the Earth-One Superman and Batman above is because I'm making a comment that while a team-up between the two should have a dynamic and should demonstrate some "fundamental difference," they should not be portrayed as enemies. All that does is intensify already-existing fan-rivalries which are pointless and don't lend themselves to the fictional universe of a given story. The current Justice League comic seems to understand this, so here's hoping that future adaptations into other media--including graphic novels like the Earth One series--do not forget that.
