Does Similarity In Premise Have An Effect On A Character's Use And Popularity?

I was thinking about how DC and Marvel have a lot of characters with similar traits similar traits (powers, origins, personalities, themes etc) both in the other company and within the same universe and wonder if this could be a road block to continued use and potential popularity.

Take for instance Raven of Teen Titans and Nightshade of Suicide Squad and Shadowpact

Both are pale-skinned brunettes who dress in black or dark blue.

Both manipulate shadows.

Both are the product of a union between a human and non-human parent.

Both have siblings they have fought.

Both have angst due to their non-human heritage.

So what I'm asking is, could a character's similarities to other more popular characters be a hindrance?

I have never heard of Nightshade before, so... maybe?

As far as similar characters across company lines, I feel as long as the two characters have something to set themselves apart theyre fine.

Take Hawkeye and Green Arrow for instance. Both technicolored archers, and the Badass Normal of their respective teams. What do they have to set themselves apart? Well, Arrow has his liberal activism, for one. And Hawkeye has his "former-villain-turned-good" backstory, while also being a leader of heroes (as opposed to Arrow's typical loner tendencies, not counting sidekicks).

I'd say that yes, too much similarity can impact a character's use and popularity, particularly if one character is significantly better known than the other. Nightshade is actually a much older character than Raven, being one of the characters acquired by DC when they got the Charlton Comics stable, but she's been used sparingly and significantly altered from the original version of her character.

I'd say the opposite also applies - since fiction doesn't spring out of a tap on demand, people tend to seek out characters similar to ones they already follow so as to fill the gap. My own appreciation of Deadpool led me to both Deathstroke (an amoral mercenary with the occasional soft spot) and Lobo (an irreverent nigh-invincible comedic bruiser), since they represent aspects of Wade himself. I'd imagine the same could work for other alternate company equivalents, getting extra fans because of their similarities, rather than in spite of them.

I have to agree with Eldritcho and Robbery on this. Similarities in premise does have an effect on a character's use and popularity.

Take for example Captain Marvel. He and Superman have A LOT in common in terms of power sets, theme of being the most powerful super hero, civilian identity working in a news outlet, having a bald mad scientist arch enemy, have a distaff counterpart, etc. This causes DC to file a lawsuit on Fawcett Comics which eventually led to their line of comics to fall under the DC banner.

However, because there are some unique difference in Captain Marvel (being a kid who can change into an adult super, being more magic based than science, a lot more cartoony in nature) DC continued to use the character in any form of media as he is not too similar to Superman and actually gives a different story to tell unlike their flagship character.

But for a character who isn't used due to similarities, I would say Elongated Man is a perfect example. The guy is a pretty fun rubber character unique for being the first super hero to publicly announce his secret identity and being a detective more than a super hero. However, he shares a lot of similarities to Plastic Man. Hell, his inclusion in the League was only because DC at the time couldn't use Plastic Man in the title so they have to make their own original rubber hero. Considering how little DC use the character post 2000 and the increase use of Plastic Man (which more people are familiar with due to the original cartoon and Batman The Brave and the Bold), its clear Elongated Man (as well as his wife Sue Dibny) are getting Put On the Bus (which eventually crashed, but then came back to live and is just commuting).

But all this seems to only have an effect on characters who are in the same company. Different companies, however, doesn't seem to have a problem. Hell, its because of said similarities (and slight difference) is what makes intercompany crossovers so fun to read (DC vs. Marvel, JLA/Avengers).

Yeah, with Captain Marvel/Shazam, DC's most recent attempts with the character seem to try to focus on his more magical aspects, and they've co-opted his magical lightning (which used to only transform him from Billy to Captain Marvel) into being a large part of his powers. So they're obviously trying to make him different from Superman.

At the same time, though, they make use of loads of versions of Batman and Superman (the whole Batman Inc bit, and Superboy, Supergirl, Superwoman, the Super-Man, etc). Those characters are more deliberately derivative rather than unintentionally similar, though.

I won't say it doesn't matter ... but comic-book heroes have a pretty limited number of premises you can combine, and many of the most original ones aren't that great. But similar premises can give rise to very different characters, with very different milieux and adventures, and those have a far greater effect.

I have noticed that there seems to be an important part of the superhero fandom (or at least a very vocal one) that simply likes reading the same stuff over and over and over again, and reacts with great disgust when some story takes them out of the comfort zone. If Status Quo Is God, and have been so for half a century, there are only so much new stories that you can narrate in that context.

Take for example Ultimate Marvel: Marvel tries to get out of the confort zone, and create a new universe where the characters and premises are radically different from the mainstream ones. Civil War also tried to redefine things, by changing the very premise of how does a superhero work (they are either The Empire or La Résistance, and not just "mistery man saves the world and dissapears in the night"). Fandom reaction? Loads and loads of "They Changed It, Now It Sucks!", until Marvel takes down those projects and simply goes back to the eternal sameness that the fans want so badly. So yes, any modern comic book's story is a rehash of the same story that has been told so many times before, because that's what the fans want.

Hell, even long standing changes that make the characters "grow", like Peter Parker getting married with Mary Jane or Wally West becoming the titular Flash, are eventually undone. And let's not even get started with death, something that should be the end, and that never sticks. Bruce banner was killed in Civil War II, and he has not been dead for just a full year before they bring him back!

edited 27th Oct '17 7:54:32 PM by GrigorII

I wouldn't list the dissolving of Spider-Man's marriage given no one except Joe Quesada wanted that.

And even people who liked the Ultimate Universe that it was a mess by the end.

And I'm not sure what this has to do with the thread's question.

edited 27th Oct '17 8:44:59 PM by windleopard

Over in the Marvel comics thread there was a discussion of exactly this kind of thing. Basically, it seems like because of the presence of a new Wasp (Nadia Pym) there's less interest in Stature (Cassie Lang). The two of them have the same basic power of Size Shifting but Nadia has some more "bells and whistles" as well as a more interesting/unusual backstory.

Another one that came to mind for me, that's kind of lampshaded in Superior Foes of Spiderman. The B or C-list villain Boomerang has basically the same abilities as Bullseye (albeit not as good) and it would make a lot of sense to have him face off against Hawkeye and frame him as the Evil Counterpart, because the two have abilities that are both similar and with a nice contrast, in addition to having similar personalities. But Bullseye has always been a much more major character, probably because of his Hero Killer status and being a leading cause of Stuffed into the Fridge. Which is probably why when the Dark Avengers was being written, Bullseye rather than Boomerang was the one pretending to be Hawkeye. Incidentally, and also tied to this discussion, Boomerang is an Alternate Company Equivalent of DC's Captain Boomerang.

Edit- Thinking about, the Nadia and Cassie example gets at something that's pretty typical, wherein when there's a "family" (literal or figurative) of characters with the same/similar powers, when a newer one is introduced or gains more prominence, one or more tend to end up in Comic-Book Limbo. Like for instance, with other "young Captain America" characters introduced and Sam Wilson becoming Captain America, Elija Bradley/Patriot dropped off the radar. A new Patriot was just introduced with the result that the recently introduced new Falcon went into Limbo and the old Patriot was pushed even further into limbo.

And there's been something similar with the influx of Spider-People limiting the appearances of May Parker/Spider-Girl and Mania.

edited 28th Oct '17 12:38:32 PM by Hodor2

Actually, I believe the Elijah thing is due to rights issues.

The problem with the Ultimate Universe was not They Changed It, Now It Sucks!, it was they turned everyone into an immoral douche nozzle for no apparent reason. Civil War suffers from a near identical problem, with the added crime of taking place in what was supposed to be the 616 Universe.

Changing things is one thing. Leaving a character unrecognizable is another. Making them into an unrecognizable scumbag is another one altogether.

Fair enough. Also, maybe not the best example, since he wasn't really replaced in-story, except to the extent that Joaquin!Falcon and the new Patriot filled a role he might have been expected to occupy.

@ Grigorll

This is a thread about character similarity, not story similarity.

edited 1st Nov '17 9:26:37 AM by RAlexa21th

Those I said were just examples, don't get lost in the specifics of each example. The point is that the audience of comic books is a conservative one, which does not want changes. Not in plots and not in characters; after all characters are just a plot device. The answer to the original question is no, a huge similarity between characters is not a hindrance, in fact that's exactly what the audience wants. Iconic characters, those that have been published since a long time, become templates. Other characters have to simply fit into those templates for audiences to accept them, and those iconic characters must be forever left inside those templates.

Only cosmetic changes, such as removing the wings from Captain America's mask, may get a pass. Real and deep changes, those that leave things unrecognizable, are rejected. And if they don't take place in an elseworld sandbox but with the actual character, it is almost a "crime".

Just check post 12. I rest my case.

You rest your case on people not wanting to read a series full of heroes who were written as rapists, domestic abusers, creeps, and morons? Seems rather a weak argument.

I actually kind of like Civil War number one (at least the stuff that Mark Millar didn't write.) A lot of the stuff during and after it was cool. It was a story that really could have only been told in the Marvel Universe, and I liked the dynamic it created, where you had sanctioned heroes like the Mighty Avengers, underground ones like Spider-Man and Hercules, and then Nova who didn't want to deal with any of it and went back into space. I would've preferred it to actually keep going and change more stuff before the next big event and the eventual reset button that was the Heroic Age.

And with the Ultimate Universe, the problem wasn't that they made changes, the problem is that the changes weren't good. Ultimate Spider-Man made good changes, like updating the origin, giving cool new interpretations to characters like Doc Ock and Osborn. Ultimates, on the other hand, just made everyone into a huge, unlikable tool. So, bad changes.