Why Do DC & Marvel Have Similar Characters?

moonknight=batman
nova=GL
that pic of the avengers and the JLA fighting is sweet!!!!

in the early years everyone was friends though they bounced ideas and what not off each other

No sense looking at the similarities between the heroes of the Marvel and DC universes...go deeper and look at the similarities between modern day mythological (super)heroes, and those of the ancient world. Notice how the Romans developed several gods similiar to the Greeks, now notice how several modern day heroes resemble them. Case in point...since they were brought up, how about Flash & Quicksilver - Hermes & Mercury. Carl Jung came up with categories of archetypes, and the heroes fall into various categories. For more on this consult the work of Joseph Campbell. Until then, just enjoy.

The Sentry really wasn't created to compete with Superman. He didn't appear until 2000 and was created as a joke more than anything. I mean obviously there are similarities between the characters but the thought process wasn't "hey let's create this character that's similar to Superman." It was more akin to "hey wouldn't it be funny if we create this hoax about Stan Lee creating a Superman like character back in the sixties" because Stan was opposed to creating these "all powerful" characters.

The main idea that Stan had, and why Marvel comics was successful, was for the reader to care more about the person who was the super hero, than the actual super hero. That's the difference between Marvel and DC or at least it used to be before DC started emulating the Marvel formula. Of course the characters are going to be similar. I mean there are only so many diff kinds of powers to go around. But the thing that made the Marvel characters unique was the everyday challenges they faced. Whether it was the high school trials and tribulations of Peter Parker, the eventual alcoholism of Tony Stark, or the "family dynamic" of the Fantastic Four, the Marvel characters connected to the reader on a diff level than the DC characters did.

i have a question, in your article you wrote this sentence -"Fans talk about loving Batman, Iron Man and Spider-Man because they are human and dark." - Spiderman is neither dark nor is he human in the same respect as Batman or iron man, he has powers (super agility, enhanced strength) he is a super human, and he isn't remotely dark when compared to batman. Just thought it was it little strange when you made that comparison.

I liked your article though, i think its cool. i do think that some characters are kinda weak (hawkeye, green arrow, pyro, aquaman...to name a few).

the reason they dont make it like real life is to let you remember that its not REAL, they are works of pure FANTASY. they dont want dumbasses trying to jump from rooftop to rooftop like daredevil and batman do in their comics. it should seem obvious but look at how many people injure or even themselves and others trying to imitate pro wrestling. they need to keep their original characters because thats what fans have grown up on for the past 75 years or so. those comics are just as popular now, if not more so, than they were then. killing them off just kills off the fans of that comic. yes the characters are similar, but the basic stories are different, and its the story that makes the character. perhaps if they introduced new characters as surpassers or villains against the heroes (i.e. venom and deadpool) the newer characters would be more attractive to the fans of the older heroes. but hey i like venom and i like deadpool. what i would like to see is the super villains win, sometimes beating or even outsmarting the heroes. but not killing them... i saw 4 different comics depicting the death of wolverine the other day and was utterly lost.

Darkseid/Thanos
Doomsday/Hulk

Aaron, while an interesting and well written article I have a few problems with it and will hopefully spark debate rather than any arguments or negativity with you. I'll list my problems with your article that I personally found:

1) While you can make comparisons with Batman and Iron Man, I find the comparisons to be very superficial. I respectfully disagree that Iron Man is the true identity whereas Tony Stark is the disguise; I believe Tony is the actual identity. It is the man of Tony Stark that is the most compelling about the character, rather than the "Iron Man" aspect of him. I think the movie showed how true that was; the film could've not had Iron Man in it at all and just RDJ as Tony and we'd still have a captivating and compelling character. Whereas with Batman, I agree with you; he is the true persona whereas Bruce Wayne is just a foil. Without the Batman identity (in the comics and films) there wouldn't be anything interesting. But I believe that if the Iron Man film and comics didn't have the actual armoured Iron Man identity appear it wouldn't be such a bad thing like with Batman.

2) The similarities between the other characters you listed are clear; I recognise them too but again they're superficial. Yes, Quicksilver and Flash have the same powers, same goes for Green Arrow and Hawkeye but their differences outnumber the similarities SO much. As characters, fully realised characters, Quicksilver and Flash couldn't be any more different; same goes for the other characters especially Wonder Woman and Ms. Marvel!!

3) I'm sorry to disappint you Aaron, but as time progresses the very idea of "Creativity" and "Originality" becomes very very limited and rare. Why? Because of time itself. As one person comes up with an original idea, it's impossible to come up with a new one afterwards. With billions of people living on earth throughout history you will consequently have an even greater number of original ideas and concepts produced from those billions of people. But soon there comes a time when all original thoughts and ideas have been thought-up and then you inevitably have to rely on either rehashing those former original ideas or just tweaking original ideas to make it seem original when in fact it's just an old idea dressed up in new clothes!

So as time progresses it becomes harder for later generations of writers and creators to come up with new and original ideas because all the original ideas have been taken! It's no fault of the writers, it's no fault of the companies like Marvel and DC - they're trying their best so we can't criticise their efforts or lack of creativity...It's just the way things are tbh and you or anyone else can't change it.

Originality and new, different ideas are hard to come by these days. I even suggest you try coming up with at least 5 new and original ideas that have never been done before. You'll soon recognise it's a near impossible task. I say "near" because sometimes there are rare moments where true originality is created; but it's rare. I thought that The Authority's Jack Hawksmoor had the most original power in recent years but i even found out the other day that it had been done before! It's impossible for writers to keep track of all ideas that've been done and to try and steer clear of them and try to come up with something different. You come up with what you think is a new idea and then you realise that it's been done before, either in a different part of the world or in a different time. This is like when I first saw the Matrix and thought "whoa...that is SO original and different". But when I realised how similar it was to Grant Morrison's "The Invisibles" i realised that being lucky and hitting new and different ideas is extremely difficult!

Another example is that popular thought is that Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" is original because it's a literary classic and a timeless master-piece that transcends time and cultural boundaries. But then again, Shakespeare re-hashed that play from another play written before it. Shakespeare "borrowed" a lot of ideas from other writers and pieces of literature, yet popular opinion still hails him as being "original". This is just an example to show that "originality" (even from revered and respected writers like Shakespeare) really is truly difficult to come by and isn't just a problem of Marvel and DC writers

I remember fearing how mass audiences would think the ending of Watchmen would be cliched; the idea that a good man like Rorschach would kill and sacrifice a few people to save the entire world. The very concept of that has been hammered to death - most recent example I can think of is in Heroes Season 1 with Linderman's desire to blow up NY in order to have the world rally together and create peace. I know Heroes was created after the graphic novel of Watchmen, but Heroes reached a greater mass audience before Watchmen the film did so I feared that people would deem Watchmen as unoriginal despite Watchmen preceding it. The same goes for it's dark and philosophical content. Watchmen revolutionised comics because it showed that comics could be more than what they were. That's why it is hailed as such a "Bible" in the comicbook industry. But to the normal person on the street who watched both the Dark Knight and Watchmen, they'd probably think Dark Knight was the first comic book film to make comic books "dark and philosophical" and that Watchmen was just copying it a year later. We comicbook fans know that's crap, but the uninformed don't.

These examples are just to demonstrate that originality is a complex mix of time and perception. What is perceived as original may in fact not be and vice versa!

So when you suggest that Spider-Man should not always be the good guy well...that's a matter of perception again, especially during Civil War. He sided with Tony, he registered. Now depending on your perception - whether Tony or Cap was morally right - then whether Spidey is good or bad depends on that perception. You may've thought that having Spider-Man not being good is different but Civil War shows that that idea has been done already.

4)You said you'd like something new to be done with the Marvel Universe and suggested that with this Dark Reign Marvel should do something ballsy and have the villains win or the Marvel U become a universe of villains - well, you've already got that with Mark Millar's "Old Man Logan"; you even have it with "Wanted". And your suggestion that why doesn't Marvel do something bold and kill everyone - well...they are doing that with the Ultimate Universe. So you can't fault Marvel's attempts at being new and different like you want. But look at the backlash Ultimatum's got for being bold and killing off characters; unfortunately the majority of comicdom just doesn't take lightly change and difference on such a large scale. Remember the rumour that the Ultimate Universe was gonna take over 616 as the official, canon Marvel Universe and the backlash from that?

What I love about comics as a medium compared to others such as TV or literature is that it is truly a medium that has a geater potential for creating originality and creativity. But as I mentioned before: originality and new ideas are rare. Grant Morrison's "New X-Men" run had some great original and different ideas but that was almost 10 years ago! And Wildstorm's "Planetary", "Authority" and "WildCats 3.0" also had amazing originality but again that was almost more than 10 years ago and with the "Planetar" it was riffing off pre-established ideas!

So new, different and originality in comics, especially from Marvel and DC is and forever will be a rarity that cannot be blamed on lack of creativity on the writer's part.

RADIATE!

ACTUALLY NO LEE MARVELS FIRST ISSUE WAS 1939 TORCH N NAMOR R IN IT

part three of radiate's mini article
Curios Case of Benjamin Button-Forest Gump
transformers (film)-Men in Black (still love transformers)
every adam sandler movie-every other adam sandler movie

there has been cross overs

MsKyle08 - that's an old argument and completely understandable, but X-Men came out 3 months after Doom Patrol first appeared and because of publishing times etc. it would've been virtually impossible for Stan Lee to have ripped-off Doom Patrol; that is unless Stan Lee somehow knew Doom Patrol's concept waaaaay in advance of Doom Patrol actually being published. Anyways, you could even argue that the original Doom Patrol was a rip off of the Fantastic Four. Even then, the X-Men became so much more than what the Doom Patrol was/is so while similarities are abound when they were created, their differences now really are too big to be ignored that it's impossible to say Doom Patrol and X-Men are rip offs of the other.

Greenhatter02/Aaron (sorry, dunno which one to call you lol) - thanks for your kind words. Although, I do have to reveal that I'm 21 myself lol. But the only reason that it may seem I know a lot about creativity, especially in comics, is because I study an English degree. As an English student you read so much literature and theory about literature that you tend to realise patterns etc. and I've learnt that the very idea of "originality" in literature is very rare nowadays because it's all been done before or because someone unfortunately just pipped you to the post and came up with the idea before you. Another great example is "Harry Potter" - while mass readership may think it's original, in fact there has been one accusation of plagarism from Nancy Stouffer who wrote "Larry Potter and His Best Friend Lilly" and "The Legend of Rah and the Muggles" in 1984, which obviously predates "Harry Potter"! Even some people see comparisons between "Harry Potter" and Neil Gaiman's "The Books of Magic"!

Anyways, to go back to my point; my English studies has allowed me to apply theories etc. to comic books - comic book literature isn't that far removed from novels etc. - so I've had a chance to see comics in a different light. So where there is a problem of a lack of originality and creativity in comics, rest assured that it's not just a problem inherent to comics but to all facets of literature.

That's why I love it so much when I do come across something truly unique and different in comics. As I mentioned before, I really believe comics is the only medium where originality, uniqueness and newness can really flourish. I dunno what it is about the comicbook medium that lends itself to innovativeness and high octane originality but it does!

That's also why I love exploring new and different comics. I love my Marvel (not so much mainstream DC, always been more of a Marvel man since birth lol) but I love exploring non-mainstream comics e.g. Wildstorm titles, "Wanted", "League of Extraorindary Gentlemen", "The Invisibles", "Black Summer", "The Surrogates", "Whiteout", "30 Days of Night" etc. etc.

I just think if you want originality and creativity in comics you just need to go a little deeper into the comic book industry and really keep your ear open for any non-Marvel/DC titles. That's not to say Marvel and DC lack creativity, but naturally they won't have as much as other non-big two comics. Creativity is naturally related to freedom; with Marvel and DC obviously having strict policies and mandates that hinder creative freedom, you won't have much creativity. That's why it's awesome when Marvel/DC take a chance e.g. Grant Morrison's "New X-Men", Brian K. Vaughn's "Runaways", The Ultimate Universe etc.

RADIATE!

I agree with some of your comments, but I actually think Marvel is starting to improve on the originallity, I think Civil War its a great example, the main antagonist were all heroes, world War Hulk had a promesing start even when the end was not all that great, Secret Invasion is an intresting take on the skrulls and the new Dark Reing is an improvement over the Thunderbolt concept. Actually I think Drak Reing is a story where the villians have already won.
So yea, they could still take new hights, but Marvel is getting there. Im not really sure about DC scince I dont read their comics, but I bet they must be doing something to compete against Marvel.

Also Radiate, I agree with you about the non-main streamish DC. I like Vertigo alot, especially Hellblazer.

I loveee Hell Blazer!!!!!!!!

Radiate's point was much more well thought out. I just posted something on my fansite. I did not expect or assume they would put it on the front page. I was just posting my thoughts.

Umbrella Academy is really pretty good. I read the first graphic novel and it was full of holes. Which were not really important to the main story. I was frustrated until I realized it was not just one book,but it is a series. The second full book comes out on October 29th. While it is extremely creative, I was not blown away by it. I did think it was very good though. I like the artistic style it has, as well. You should absolutely check it out.

Well seems like I AM more of an only DC-Marvel kind of guy.. the weird thing Greenhatter is that both YOUR comments in this article and Radiate´s ones ARE WAY more informative and constructive than the Text you wrote for the headline and the editorial itself, doyouknowwhatimean?

Too bad that Shaman didn´t get to see your comments and radiate´s comments on those titles you talk about, i am sure he would have contribuited with something.. but it seems he got the hell out of this Internet-Window after rading your Rant!! LOL!! ;-]