Supergirl Animated Movie

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

There aren't any female-led ongoing titles in the Top 30 at the moment, but Wonder Woman and Batgirl are currently outselling Daredevil, The Incredible Hulk, The Fantastic Four, and Captain America.

The DC animated line is sticking to Batman, Superman and/or the Justice League because those titles deliver the kind of fast sales their retail partners are looking for. The chances of DC's female characters getting on screen in a starring capacity is actually a lot better in a live action movie or television series where you have the advantage of a big marketing campaign and casting stars to draw attention, while the animated movie line has to generate sales with a very small marketing campaign.

That's not to say it's easy to get them on screen in a live action capacity, as demonstrated by the failed attempts to get a Wonder Woman movie and/or TV series made, but I think we'll see a DC heroine in a live action starring role before we see one in an animated starring role.

[Christopher]

Ian Keldon wrote:

---

^You have to remember, Christopher, that the marketing people for these animated projects ALSO look at the sales performance of the comics themselves as guides. Female-lead comics aren't selling, for whatever reason.

The reason, according to the comments I've read from female comics fans online, is that the big publishers tend to marginalize and objectify female characters in a way that alienates female readers. Remember the controversy over the demeaning portrayals of Catwoman, Starfire, and Voodoo in their first New 52 appearances? There are high points like Batwoman and Renee Montoya and the Birds of Prey, well-portrayed female characters that women readers really respond to, but there are still far too many female characters that are just softcore pandering to teenage males.

So it's not right to say that the industry is just responding to a lack of interest from the female audience. It's the other way around -- the audience is driven away by the decisions of the industry. There's plenty of female readership and creative participation in independent comics, but they don't find the top publishers' product as inviting because of the way it treats female characters.

And I should add that there are surely plenty of men, including myself, who would rather see well-rendered, respectfully treated female characters than just ones that pander to adolescent fantasies.

[Gotham Central]

Christopher wrote:

---

The reason, according to the comments I've read from female comics fans online, is that the big publishers tend to marginalize and objectify female characters in a way that alienates female readers. Remember the controversy over the demeaning portrayals of Catwoman, Starfire, and Voodoo in their first New 52 appearances? There are high points like Batwoman and Renee Montoya and the Birds of Prey, well-portrayed female characters that women readers really respond to, but there are still far too many female characters that are just softcore pandering to teenage males.

So it's not right to say that the industry is just responding to a lack of interest from the female audience. It's the other way around -- the audience is driven away by the decisions of the industry. There's plenty of female readership and creative participation in independent comics, but they don't find the top publishers' product as inviting because of the way it treats female characters.

And I should add that there are surely plenty of men, including myself, who would rather see well-rendered, respectfully treated female characters than just ones that pander to adolescent fantasies.

You still seem to be missing or minimizing the point. Its not just that women don't read those titles...men don't either. The key is that there have to be enough women to buy the title to offset the fact that men won't. You seem to reject the idea that men generally do not buy titles with female leads despite the fact that there is ample evidence to prove this. Hell Wonder Woman is one of the most famous comic characters out there and the feedback about her new 52 title has been overwhelmingly positive....and she STILL sells WAY fewer issues than her male counterparts. The same is true of Batwoman, Supergirl and Batgirl...and none of them faced the controversey that dogged Catwoman.

To DC's credit they have stuck by those titles, but you cannot ignore the reality that men typically don't buy those titles and there are not enough women to pick up the slack.

If you're Time Warner/DC or Disney/Marvel you might take a risk on making a comic that will have a small readership, but there is no way you're going to sink millions into a project that won't have much of an audience.

[Christopher]

^I'm not ignoring the reality -- I'm refusing to settle for the reality. Discriminatory realities never change unless people stop being complacent apologists for the status quo and instead stand up and fight to change the status quo. It's been done many times in the past, like back when it was assumed that no black actor could ever carry a mainstream movie, or that no black man could ever run for president. For generations, people settled for the status quo and fell back on the same old tired arguments for why things were the way they were. But there were others who were braver and stronger and more determined than that, who actually made an effort to change things, and they succeeded. I don't care if audiences now aren't responding to female-led titles -- they can learn to respond to them if they get enough good ones, if creators really make the effort to show them something new. Audiences are not immutable, and their tastes can be broadened. It's happened before. It happened in movies with Ripley and Sarah Connor. It can happen in comics and animation, if the will and the inspiration are there.

[USS Kongo]

I'd always rather see female superheroes--as well as female characters overall--in films and TV. I've preferred films where women were the lead characters, like Salt, Haywire and Smilla's Sense Of Snow, to name but a few.

I loved the Wonder Woman animated film, and hoped to see sequels from it. Now I see why nothing more came of it. It's a shame that the only way we can get to see Supergirl these days is only if she's guest-starring in a Superman animated movie. I'd love to see Supergirl--not to mention Batgirl--in her own adventure.

Sean

[Ian Keldon]

Christopher wrote:

---

The reason, according to the comments I've read from female comics fans online, is that the big publishers tend to marginalize and objectify female characters in a way that alienates female readers.

Aren't you one of the people always minimizing the importance of on-line posts by fans?

I've seen plenty of non-objectivizing portrayals of female characters such as Ms Marvel, Rogue, Sue Richards, Silver Sable, etc. For that matter, even characters like Moonstone and Emma Frost. They may be a b-word, but they're strong, confident, empowered and multifaceted

Remember the controversy over the demeaning portrayals of Catwoman, Starfire, and Voodoo in their first New 52 appearances?

Can't comment as I haven't read them.

There are high points like Batwoman and Renee Montoya and the Birds of Prey, well-portrayed female characters that women readers really respond to, but there are still far too many female characters that are just softcore pandering to teenage males.

I disagree...see above.

So it's not right to say that the industry is just responding to a lack of interest from the female audience. It's the other way around -- the audience is driven away by the decisions of the industry. There's plenty of female readership and creative participation in independent comics, but they don't find the top publishers' product as inviting because of the way it treats female characters.

Again, does not square with the facts.

And I should add that there are surely plenty of men, including myself, who would rather see well-rendered, respectfully treated female characters than just ones that pander to adolescent fantasies.

And we have had them. And they don't sell. For that matter, blatantly pandering comics like Tarot:Witch of the Black Rose don't sell all that well either (at least by Big Two standards).

[Ian Keldon]

Christopher wrote:

---

^I'm not ignoring the reality -- I'm refusing to settle for the reality. Discriminatory realities never change

It's not "discriminatory", "mysogynist" or any of the other Womynist labels that get thrown out there. It's about what sells.

Trust me, I know what it's like to have favored characters get screwed because they don't sell. I have the majority of the Byrne WW run. I love good strong female leads like Silver Sable, Widow, Spider-Girl (the real one, aka May Parker).

But they don't sell, and in this climate neither Disney nor Marvel is going to risk much on them. Not because they're women, but because they are, unfortunately, a bad investment.

[Admiral_Young]

Okay to return discussion to the actual movie, I have unable to find very many details. I did find this:

http://superheroshows.blogspot.ca/20...c-in-lost.html

It has a speculated title for the DTV. "Superman: The Lost City of Krypton" and contains a plot synopsis as well. As well as being an emotional focal point of Geoff Johns run, it also was the catalyst for the start of the New Krypton story which immediately followed this arc. So perhaps this means we will get an animated version of New Krypton which would thrill me.

[Ian Keldon]

Geoff Johns is overrated. I HATE his Green Lantern stuff with a passion.

[JD]

Ian Keldon wrote:

---

[
Trust me, I know what it's like to have favored characters get screwed because they don't sell. I have the majority of the Byrne WW run. I love good strong female leads like Silver Sable, Widow, Spider-Girl (the real one, aka May Parker).

Ok, those are all Marvel characters, so would you they handle their women better, or do you just read Marvel?
EDIT: As for how comics with a female lead comics sell, I was just looking on Comixology and 7 (Captain Marvel, Wonder Woman, Before Watchmen: Silk Spectre, Ame-Comi III: Duela Dent, Supergirl, Batwoman, Catwoman) female led comics are in the top 70, and if they are in popularity order (it doesn't specify the order) Captain Marvel is #12. No to mention that there are several ensemble books that feature female characters in prominent roles in the list.

[Mars]

Gotham Central wrote:

---

Perhaps, but as a business decision it makes sense. Think about it, the audience for superhero films is overwhelmingly male. Men, in general, tend not to consume genre products with female leads and there are usually not enough female fans to pick up the slack.

A good example of this was SuckerPunch. Most of the people that loved and appreciated what was done in that movie were women. Men, by and large, hated it. This is probably why it took so long for the WW video to make back its money. Wonder Woman is the most famous female superhero in the world...and still she struggles. I doubt a Supergirl or Batgirl film would fare any better. As long as female led properties struggle to get a male audience its going to be harder to convince the studios to fund these films.

Why the automatic assumption that because Wonder Woman didn't do well, neither would supergirl, or because a supergirl movie was produced, it was necessarily the best of all possible supergirl movies? No one wants to blame the writer or producer of the movie if it does poorly, it is always the fault of the character concept because the writers and producers are so conceited in saying no one could write any better than they could. Wonder Woman proves nothing about supergirl, they are different characters.

If someone makes a terrible Lord of the Rings movie, is that J.R. Tolkein's fault? I think Supergirl did poorly because it was given a lousy writer and producer, if they give them better screen writers perhaps they would do better.

Ian Keldon wrote:

---

It's not "discriminatory", "mysogynist" or any of the other Womynist labels that get thrown out there. It's about what sells.

Trust me, I know what it's like to have favored characters get screwed because they don't sell. I have the majority of the Byrne WW run. I love good strong female leads like Silver Sable, Widow, Spider-Girl (the real one, aka May Parker).

But they don't sell, and in this climate neither Disney nor Marvel is going to risk much on them. Not because they're women, but because they are, unfortunately, a bad investment.

Maybe they don't sell because he can't write a good story with them, some other writer might write a better story. Its a lame excuse to write a lousy novel and then blame your fictional characters for the book being so lousy.

Ian Keldon wrote:

---

Aren't you one of the people always minimizing the importance of on-line posts by fans?

I've seen plenty of non-objectivizing portrayals of female characters such as Ms Marvel, Rogue, Sue Richards, Silver Sable, etc. For that matter, even characters like Moonstone and Emma Frost. They may be a b-word, but they're strong, confident, empowered and multifaceted

Can't comment as I haven't read them.



I disagree...see above.

Again, does not square with the facts.

And we have had them. And they don't sell. For that matter, blatantly pandering comics like Tarot:Witch of the Black Rose don't sell all that well either (at least by Big Two standards).

I think if you do female characters, you write them for both make and female readers, you don't try to cater to one or the other, you end up losing both.

Christopher wrote:

---

The reason, according to the comments I've read from female comics fans online, is that the big publishers tend to marginalize and objectify female characters in a way that alienates female readers. Remember the controversy over the demeaning portrayals of Catwoman, Starfire, and Voodoo in their first New 52 appearances? There are high points like Batwoman and Renee Montoya and the Birds of Prey, well-portrayed female characters that women readers really respond to, but there are still far too many female characters that are just softcore pandering to teenage males.

So it's not right to say that the industry is just responding to a lack of interest from the female audience. It's the other way around -- the audience is driven away by the decisions of the industry. There's plenty of female readership and creative participation in independent comics, but they don't find the top publishers' product as inviting because of the way it treats female characters.

And I should add that there are surely plenty of men, including myself, who would rather see well-rendered, respectfully treated female characters than just ones that pander to adolescent fantasies.

I agree, one should write a good story about them, its the story that sells. If one writes a bad story, and then says no one can write any better and just attributes it to a lousy character because their slutty female pictures won't sell, that is a cop out.

USS Kongo wrote:

---

I'd always rather see female superheroes--as well as female characters overall--in films and TV. I've preferred films where women were the lead characters, like Salt, Haywire and Smilla's Sense Of Snow, to name but a few.

I loved the Wonder Woman animated film, and hoped to see sequels from it. Now I see why nothing more came of it. It's a shame that the only way we can get to see Supergirl these days is only if she's guest-starring in a Superman animated movie. I'd love to see Supergirl--not to mention Batgirl--in her own adventure.

Sean

Women are nicer to look at, that's for sure, all they need is a good writer, and writers that are not humble enough to conceded that someone might have written a better story than they did blame the character they write about instead, it makes them feel better to say female characters don't sell than to admit they didn't write a good enough story about them.

[Hound of UIster]

Mars wrote:

---

Maybe they don't sell because he can't write a good story with them, some other writer might write a better story. Its a lame excuse to write a lousy novel and then blame your fictional characters for the book being so lousy.

In the case of WW, there was no correlation between the numbers sold and the actual quality of the story. The Byrne tenure sold the most books per issue, but it was a terrible run. Yet Perez's tenure, which was the definite run on the book for around twenty years didn't sell all that well. The numbers I think speak to the fact that the principle monthly comic reader isn't really all that interested in a female character unless there is heavy objectification.

[Captain Atkin]

The real problem, for me, with a lot of these female superhero movies, is that they don't have likeable male characters in them. If you want to attract men, you need male characters in these kind of films that they can identify with. Often, men in these films (villains, boyfriends, etc...) are kind of wimpy. The Dark Knight Rises and the Amazing Spider-Man both had very likeable and strong female characters (Catwoman and Gwen Stacy). Female superhero movies need to find that same kind of balance, but in reverse, so that male audiences can identify with the male characters.

[Christopher]

^Speak for yourself. I don't need a character to be the same gender, race, or whatever as myself in order to identify with them.

[Neroon]

Mars wrote:

---

Why the automatic assumption that ....

Mars, remember to use the multi-quote button and / or the edit function, when you find different posts to which you wish to reply.