Why is Spiderman as iconic as Superman?

[fantastic_four]

Westerners may be able to relate to Spidey, but kids in Namibia, or Nepal, or Uruguay....maybe not so much.

 

Stan Lee claims the opposite is true, that he didn't intend this to happen, but Spidey is more marketable overseas than most other superheroes simply because of the mask. Yea, he's Peter Parker the Caucasian if you read the stories, but he didn't realize how easy it would be for kids around the world to ignore that fact and visualize themselves as Spider-Man in costume because he could be anyone under there.

 

Spidey is popular because he's more human and has universal appeal as a dorky teenager who breaks out of his shell as people suggested, but also because he jokes around as he fights crime, and his dexterity and lightness on his feet and while swinging around the city is so incredibly appealing. He seems to have a ton more fun while doing what he does than most other superheroes do.

[ComicConnoisseur]

Spider-man was considered iconic long before the movies, this is from 1976.

[sakaridis]

Superman's fake identity is Clark Kent.

Spiderman's true identity is Peter Parker.

So, basically you're saying that Spider-Man is as iconic as Superman because there are a lot of geeky, socially dysfunctional teenagers in the world?

[sakaridis]

You guys and you Western-centric philosophy...

 

Superman is, by far, the most popular character when the whole world is considered

 

Why?

 

Because Superman is not an American. Yes, he is a "naturalized" American, but ultimately, he's "from somewhere else."

 

Superman appeals to dreams. Dreams are pretty powerful when you don't always have the means to make them come true.

 

Westerners may be able to relate to Spidey, but kids in Namibia, or Nepal, or Uruguay....maybe not so much.

 

[Count]

I always liked spidey's back talk...The humor makes it very enjoyable...I don't get that from superman...he's just to proper and somewhat ...boring..... :shrug:

 

 

[sakaridis]

Westerners may be able to relate to Spidey, but kids in Namibia, or Nepal, or Uruguay....maybe not so much.

 

Stan Lee claims the opposite is true, that he didn't intend this to happen, but Spidey is more marketable overseas than most other superheroes simply because of the mask. Yea, he's Peter Parker the Caucasian if you read the stories, but he didn't realize how easy it would be for kids around the world to ignore that fact and visualize themselves as Spider-Man in costume because he could be anyone under there.

 

Spidey is popular because he's more human and has universal appeal as a dorky teenager who breaks out of his shell as people suggested, but also because he jokes around as he fights crime, and his dexterity and lightness on his feet and while swinging around the city is so incredibly appealing. He seems to have a ton more fun while doing what he does than most other superheroes do.

Stan Lee claims a lot of things. Most of them are not exactly true and/or accurate. At best, they are sprinkled with copious amounts of hyperbole and pizazz.

 

That may be because Stan Lee has lived most of his life as a Marvel spokesperson/company shill

[fantastic_four]

Stan Lee claims the opposite is true

Stan Lee claims a lot of things. Most of them are not exactly true and/or accurate.

 

Yes, but so do we on these boards. He's far closer to it than we are, and it can't just be dismissed out of hand unless you've seen some international sales figures.

[sakaridis]

Stan Lee claims the opposite is true

Stan Lee claims a lot of things. Most of them are not exactly true and/or accurate.

 

Yes, but so do we on these boards. He's far closer to it than we are.

Yes, but theoretically, we on these boards have nothing to gain by claiming erroneous things. He has an annual paycheck.

 

So, to sum up, we on these boards are just guilty of ignorance, while Stan Lee is guilty of lying for the benefit of Marvel Comics. We're both probably wrong, but for very different reasons

 

(To clarify, I have nothing against Stan Lee. I really like him as a personality and respect him as a writer. I also wish I had his job/career/money.)

[Snake Eyes]

That show used to be a "must watch".

 

 

I watch it with my 6 year old all the time.

He loves it

He regularly yells out "Hey You Guys!!!" at the playground, etc

 

About Spiderman v Superman

Anyone read Joseph Campbells "The Hero with a Thousand Faces"?

 

Love Campbell's work...just listened to an old documentary series put on CD ...The Power of Myth....absolutely wonderful stuff. I have listened to that series on many a long road trip. Campbell was fascinating...need to re-read Masks of God soon

[nearmint]

I think the movies were successful because Spider-Man was such a popular character, not vice-versa.

 

Good point. Where as on the other hand I think the Iron Man movies really helped out his popularity.

 

Spidey is a character that is more identifiable for a kid/teen/young adult than the old Superman. Has DC ever rebooted the Superman series and had Superman as a teen/young adult ? I can only think of Smallville which is/was on for ten seasons ?

 

There were 100 episodes of The Adventures of Superboy from 1988-1992. Not to mention the Superboy comic, that was published for 28 years.

[Bookery]

Westerners may be able to relate to Spidey, but kids in Namibia, or Nepal, or Uruguay....maybe not so much.

 

Harlan Ellison once posited that there were only 5 fictional characters truly recognized world-wide... in no particular order...

 

Tarzan, Superman, Sherlock Holmes, Mickey Mouse, Robin Hood.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

Stan Lee claims the opposite is true

Stan Lee claims a lot of things. Most of them are not exactly true and/or accurate.

 

Yes, but so do we on these boards. He's far closer to it than we are.

Yes, but theoretically, we on these boards have nothing to gain by claiming erroneous things. He has an annual paycheck.

 

So, to sum up, we on these boards are just guilty of ignorance, while Stan Lee is guilty of lying for the benefit of Marvel Comics. We're both probably wrong, but for very different reasons

 

(To clarify, I have nothing against Stan Lee. I really like him as a personality and respect him as a writer. I also wish I had his job/career/money.)

 

To redirect this away from all of us talking out of our asses, I decided to check foreign box office totals for the Spider-Man, Batman, and Superman movies from the last decade; they're listed below in order of film release. The international grosses don't point firmly at any of the characters being more or less popular outside of America. The Spider-Man foreign totals were all higher than the domestic and the opposite was true of Batman and Superman, but it's not by a wide margin until Spider-Man 3. Until SM3, the margin is close enough to believe that maybe it's not so much that Spidey is more popular overseas than the others as it is that it's possible Sony markets internationally better than Warner Brothers does. Maybe they both do well at it and Spidey is indeed more popular overseas, I don't really know.

 

Spider-Man Domestic: $403,706,375 (49.1% of total)

Spider-Man Foreign: $418,002,176 (50.9% of total)

 

Spider-Man 2 Domestic: $373,585,825 (47.7% of total)

Spider-Man 2 Foreign: $410,180,516 (52.3% of total)

 

Batman Begins Domestic: $205,343,774 (55.1% of total)

Batman Begins Foreign: $167,366,241 (44.9% of total)

 

Spider-Man 3 Domestic: $336,530,303 (37.8% of total)

Spider-Man 3 Foreign: $554,341,323 (62.2% of total)

 

Superman Returns Domestic: $200,081,192 (53.2% of total)

Superman Returns Foreign: $191,000,000 (48.8% of total)

 

The Dark Knight Domestic: $533,345,358 (53.2% of total)

The Dark Knight Foreign: $468,576,467 (46.8% of total)

[Dale Roberts]

I think Spider-Man is roughly tied with Batman for popularity, and Superman is behind them both.

 

Superman is lame, and hasn't really been relevant for years. Why is he placed first? Just because he came first?

 

Because he is the greatest comic book hero of all time.

 

Lame??? Come one. Maybe you don't like him, but that doesn't make him lame.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

I think Spider-Man is roughly tied with Batman for popularity, and Superman is behind them both.

 

Superman is lame, and hasn't really been relevant for years. Why is he placed first? Just because he came first?

 

Because he is the greatest comic book hero of all time.

 

Lame??? Come one. Maybe you don't like him, but that doesn't make him lame.

 

 

I like him, but I have to admit he's problematic. They made him far too powerful and it's hard to find competition for someone who is closer to omniscient than almost every superhero who followed him. I think most creators learned from the mistakes with him to make superheroes more vulnerable.

[Dick Pontoon]

Because he can do whatever a spider can! He spins a web any size and catches thieves just like flies.

[Dale Roberts]

I think the movies were successful because Spider-Man was such a popular character, not vice-versa.

 

Good point. Where as on the other hand I think the Iron Man movies really helped out his popularity.

 

Spidey is a character that is more identifiable for a kid/teen/young adult than the old Superman. Has DC ever rebooted the Superman series and had Superman as a teen/young adult ? I can only think of Smallville which is/was on for ten seasons ?

 

There were 100 episodes of The Adventures of Superboy from 1988-1992. Not to mention the Superboy comic, that was published for 28 years.

 

Even more important were the Fleisher Superman cartoons which were shown at the movie theatres from the early 1940s. Were shown in addition to feature presentations as shorts(generally about 15 minutes), and so were exposed to a wide variety of different people.

 

By the way, if you have not seen these, you should get them. They are fantastic.

 

[EastEnd]

I can buy into the notion that Spiderman is more popular than Superman (certainly among the under-40 crowd, not so sure about the over-40 crowd), but saying that Spiderman is as iconic as Superman is like saying Homer Simpson is as iconic as Mickey Mouse... for myself, I think it's a stretch. Globally, Superman is as much a symbol of Americana as apple pie and baseball (much like Mickey is). Spiderman is certainly an important and valuable character and does have a strong following among people drawn to this corner of pop culture, but at the end of the day I think the average person on the street just views him as a superhero... one of many. Superman imparts so much more historically and symbolically ("truth, justice and the American way" and all that).

 

There is an air of familiarity with Superman that comes with his global iconic status. Most people will recognize the name Clark Kent... a lot of poeple will know that Spiderman's name is "Peter" (but what's his last name?). Most people will recognize the name of Superman's love interest "Lois Lane;" not sure that the same could be said about Mary Jane Watson. Most people would recognize that Superman lives in "Metropolis" (a real city even markets it); do most people know that Spiderman is New York based? More people would recognize the "Daily Planet" than the "Daily Bugle" and most would know that "kryptonite" is Superman's weakness (it's even used in modern jargon). Now this is all my supposition of course-- it would be an interesting poll to take of people just walking down the street in this country and others -- but man, the whole world would recognize that big red "S" and what it stands for when they see it... and when we talk "icons" I think that's what we mean.

[Dale Roberts]

I think Spider-Man is roughly tied with Batman for popularity, and Superman is behind them both.

 

Superman is lame, and hasn't really been relevant for years. Why is he placed first? Just because he came first?

 

Because he is the greatest comic book hero of all time.

 

Lame??? Come one. Maybe you don't like him, but that doesn't make him lame.

 

 

I like him, but I have to admit he's problematic. They made him far too powerful and it's hard to find competition for someone who is closer to omniscient than almost every superhero who followed him. I think most creators learned from the mistakes with him to make superheroes more vulnerable.

 

I don't find that to be a problem. I have always enjoyed most Superman stuff I have read. Certainly not all knowing, maybe all powerful. The fact that he can do just about anything he wants is part of the vulnerability of the character. He has to choose the right things to do, realizing that he has a tremendous responsibility.

 

 

[nearmint]

I think Spider-Man is roughly tied with Batman for popularity, and Superman is behind them both.

 

Superman is lame, and hasn't really been relevant for years. Why is he placed first? Just because he came first?

 

Because he is the greatest comic book hero of all time.

 

Lame??? Come one. Maybe you don't like him, but that doesn't make him lame.

 

 

I like him, but I have to admit he's problematic. They made him far too powerful and it's hard to find competition for someone who is closer to omniscient than almost every superhero who followed him. I think most creators learned from the mistakes with him to make superheroes more vulnerable.

 

I don't find that to be a problem. I have always enjoyed most Superman stuff I have read. Certainly not all knowing, maybe all powerful. The fact that he can do just about anything he wants is part of the vulnerability of the character. He has to choose the right things to do, realizing that he has a tremendous responsibility.

 

 

I'm with you, Dale. I've never been bored by Supes. I'm frankly not that interested in a superhero that I can identity with. Superheroes should be larger than life, and Supes has always fit that bill.

[ComicConnoisseur]

Stan Lee claims the opposite is true

Stan Lee claims a lot of things. Most of them are not exactly true and/or accurate.

 

Yes, but so do we on these boards. He's far closer to it than we are.

Yes, but theoretically, we on these boards have nothing to gain by claiming erroneous things. He has an annual paycheck.

 

So, to sum up, we on these boards are just guilty of ignorance, while Stan Lee is guilty of lying for the benefit of Marvel Comics. We're both probably wrong, but for very different reasons

 

(To clarify, I have nothing against Stan Lee. I really like him as a personality and respect him as a writer. I also wish I had his job/career/money.)

 

To redirect this away from all of us talking out of our asses, I decided to check foreign box office totals for the Spider-Man, Batman, and Superman movies from the last decade; they're listed below in order of film release. The international grosses don't point firmly at any of the characters being more or less popular outside of America. The Spider-Man foreign totals were all higher than the domestic and the opposite was true of Batman and Superman, but it's not by a wide margin until Spider-Man 3. Until SM3, the margin is close enough to believe that maybe it's not so much that Spidey is more popular overseas than the others as it is that it's possible Sony markets internationally better than Warner Brothers does. Maybe they both do well at it and Spidey is indeed more popular overseas, I don't really know.

 

Spider-Man Domestic: $403,706,375 (49.1% of total)

Spider-Man Foreign: $418,002,176 (50.9% of total)

 

Spider-Man 2 Domestic: $373,585,825 (47.7% of total)

Spider-Man 2 Foreign: $410,180,516 (52.3% of total)

 

Batman Begins Domestic: $205,343,774 (55.1% of total)

Batman Begins Foreign: $167,366,241 (44.9% of total)

 

Spider-Man 3 Domestic: $336,530,303 (37.8% of total)

Spider-Man 3 Foreign: $554,341,323 (62.2% of total)

 

Superman Returns Domestic: $200,081,192 (53.2% of total)

Superman Returns Foreign: $191,000,000 (48.8% of total)

 

The Dark Knight Domestic: $533,345,358 (53.2% of total)

The Dark Knight Foreign: $468,576,467 (46.8% of total)

and let`s remember the last Batman movie`s popularity had a lot to do with Heath Ledger`s untimely death, if the Batman Rises movie does half the box office of what the Dark Knight did, WB will be happy.