The All Things Political Topic - Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is an absurd one

[Guard Dog]

Why does anyone give a f--k what Disney thinks about anything? And why do they feel the need to go after them for thinking it? They can pout and protest all they want. Florida is still going to do Florida things. Disney's corporate opinion on anything counts for f--k all in the real world so why is this worth fighting over?

[Gromnir]

13 minutes ago, Amentep said:

IIRC the unique elements of the outfits (the Superman "S"-shield, the Batsymbol, the logos, possibly other unique elements) are all trademarked.  

correct. but again, the character is gonna be public domain. the stories is gonna be public domain.  you point out the knockoffs but keep in mind the art for the superman and batman characters has also changed rather substantially every few years. ain't the art which keeps folks coming back to the title. frank miller or some other recognizable name decides he wants to make a batman story and publish it w/o dc? he can do that once is public domain. 

the author, artist, actors and directors is gonna be the potential appeal for public domain batman and not costume elements or the dc logo. heck, is not hard to imagine an older or younger bruce wayne who never dons the iconic costume in a movie or comic book series. wouldn't even be the first time such were done. would just need be done different.

HA! Good Fun!

[Chairchucker]

I'm still stuck on the desire to extend a copyright being the act of a 'woke' company.

 

All the woke kids trying to hang onto their copyrights these days, bunch of snowflakes.

 

I know, I know, I'm trying to make sense of something said by Boebert, I deserve to be perplexed...

[Amentep]

30 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

correct. but again, the character is gonna be public domain. the stories is gonna be public domain.  you point out the knockoffs but keep in mind the art for the superman and batman characters has also changed rather substantially every few years. ain't the art which keeps folks coming back to the title. frank miller or some other recognizable name decides he wants to make a batman story and publish it w/o dc? he can do that once is public domain. 

the author, artist, actors and directors is gonna be the potential appeal for public domain batman and not costume elements or the dc logo. heck, is not hard to imagine an older or younger bruce wayne who never dons the iconic costume in a movie or comic book series. wouldn't even be the first time such were done. would just need be done different.

HA! Good Fun!

Not really sure the appeal of Bruce Wayne, vigilante, but sure it can be done when Detective #27 goes into PD.  It just isn't going to be titled "Batman", it isn't going to have the trappings of Batman (like the batsymbol, or Robin for about a year or many of the famous villains; Batman's origin will literally be "he was sitting in his study reading a book when a bat flew in the window"! so none of the League of Shadows/Ra's/Talia stuff - it'd all have to be new backstory material).  Frank Miller if he wanted to could do that character already in all but name (and in fact he did when DC ultimately passed on his Batman: Holy Terror comic and he reworked and redrew parts of it to remove the Batman parts and replaced them).  

I don't think (and admittedly I may be very wrong) that there's going to be a big sea-change when the superhero characters hit public domain.  Oh sure, someone will put their version out inevitably (just like PD Conan has a comic called "The Cimmerian"), but I don't see it being really a big thing since part of the appeal of Batman is going to be things a PD derivative can't really touch (the iconography, the 80+ years of history and ultimately the DC universe itself).

13 minutes ago, Chairchucker said:

I'm still stuck on the desire to extend a copyright being the act of a 'woke' company.

All the woke kids trying to hang onto their copyrights these days, bunch of snowflakes.

I know, I know, I'm trying to make sense of something said by Boebert, I deserve to be perplexed...

I think what she's arguing isn't that desire to extend copyright is an act of a 'woke' company, but that the government shouldn't extend copyright if Disney asks because Disney is a woke company and therefore should be punished for corporate 'wrong think'.

  EDIT:

39 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

Why does anyone give a f--k what Disney thinks about anything? And why do they feel the need to go after them for thinking it? They can pout and protest all they want. Florida is still going to do Florida things. Disney's corporate opinion on anything counts for f--k all in the real world so why is this worth fighting over?

I think the thing most people are amazed at is that a 'pro-business' Republican governor is threating to change legislation that would most likely effective run the largest employer out of their state because he doesn't like their stance on an issue.

[BruceVC]

21 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

No matter how bad one guys was there is someone else out there who is worse! Even Trump. I'd have a hard time imagining a worse candidate but that doesn't mean there isn't one. 

Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth  Warren or anyone from the progressive left could be worse than Trump

First thing they would do is make CRT mandatory at all schools and then  immediately open the Mexico border to all immigrants  and then pass legislation so that only non-Americans can he employed  for the next 10 years in the interests of addressing inequality and system racism  ...oh and dont forget they would " ban the guns " for sure 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

23 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

Why does anyone give a f--k what Disney thinks about anything? And why do they feel the need to go after them for thinking it?

Besides the general tilting at "woke" windmills the GOP has been doing to stir up braindead suburbanites?

Until recently, Disney was funding these Florida politicians. This is specifically a reaction to Disney taking away money from them.

[Gromnir]

30 minutes ago, Chairchucker said:

I know, I know, I'm trying to make sense of something said by Boebert, I deserve to be perplexed...

is a doomed exercise, but am suspecting the point is the qfolks and far right voters who support boebert believe disney deserves to be punished for their wokeness. somehow wokeness is a disease to be attacked with fire and fury... unlike fake diseases such as covid-19. southeners is done with fake pandemics, but wokeness, crt and rigged elections is not to be tolerated.

disney wants __________.

doesn't matter what ____________ is. regardless, it is the duty o' red-blooded and commie hating americans to prevent disney from getting what it wants, 'cause _________ deserves outrage and grievance... or somesuch. 

@Amentep

conan is a good example 'cause the character is public domain and anybody can (and has) made movies and comics and whatever using the character. just as robin hood is not 'bout the green tights errol flynn wore, is doubtful batman is gonna be limited by trappings once famous authors and artist can do their take, particular in a digital age when self publishing and the internet makes DC far less essential for an artist or author with an established following. how many draculas has there been? how many frankensteins? herclues? thors? 

heck, particular for the comic geeks, a frank miller batman, regardless if is dc or not, is unlikely to get a "knockoff" label as you describe. again, am suspecting is gonna be the artists, authors, actors and directors who create the appeal as 'posed to the trappings which has changed in fits and spurts over the many decades. the appeal o' a dc specific batman is not gonna be particular strong once a few talented people make their own product.  

HA! Good Fun!

ps please note smallville, hardly the best superman vehicle to grace modern media, existed for ten seasons on american tv while largely eschewing the trademark aspects o' comic superman. 

Edited April 5, 2022 by Gromnir

[Chairchucker]

8 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth  Warren or anyone from the progressive left could be worse than Trump

First thing they would do is make CRT mandatory at all schools and then  immediately open the Mexico border to all immigrants  and then pass legislation so that only non-Americans can he employed  for the next 10 years in the interests of addressing inequality and system racism  ...oh and dont forget they would " ban the guns " for sure 

I'm assuming you don't genuinely think they would do any of those things, and are just using hyperbole.

 

If CRT were taught at schools, (which there is no evidence has ever been a thought, save for the scare tactics of ignorant Republican politicians) I'm not yet convinced that would be a bad thing. Same with open borders, unless you subscribe to Trump's racist 'they're rapists and criminals' nonsense, I just don't see what the issue would be. And, predictably being the Australian that I am, I definitely think gun control is something the US should have a crack at.

[Gromnir]

6 minutes ago, Chairchucker said:

I'm assuming you don't genuinely think they would do any of those things, and are just using hyperbole.

 

If CRT were taught at schools, (which there is no evidence has ever been a thought, save for the scare tactics of ignorant Republican politicians) I'm not yet convinced that would be a bad thing. 

it is literal not possible for a US President to make crt mandatory in US public schools. is no mechanic to enforce such a decree. ain't even possible for Congress to do so, though they could incentivize such to the point most states would adopt whatever bruce imagines crt to be... 'cause am betting he never did figure out what it actually is, 'cause if he did he would then understand why it is not a serious concern that public school kids would be exposed to graduate level course work which seeks to explain the inertia o' systemic racism, legitimized and codified through a nation's laws and institutions. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Malcador]

50 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth  Warren or anyone from the progressive left could be worse than Trump

First thing they would do is make CRT mandatory at all schools and then  immediately open the Mexico border to all immigrants  and then pass legislation so that only non-Americans can he employed  for the next 10 years in the interests of addressing inequality and system racism  ...oh and dont forget they would " ban the guns " for sure 

I know, the threat of white genocide is real!

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Chairchucker said:

I'm assuming you don't genuinely think they would do any of those things, and are just using hyperbole.

 

If CRT were taught at schools, (which there is no evidence has ever been a thought, save for the scare tactics of ignorant Republican politicians) I'm not yet convinced that would be a bad thing. Same with open borders, unless you subscribe to Trump's racist 'they're rapists and criminals' nonsense, I just don't see what the issue would be. And, predictably being the Australian that I am, I definitely think gun control is something the US should have a crack at.

Yes Im just exaggerating and making a joke 

But I would consider them worse than Trump but not because of those things which they cant and wont implement 

[Amentep]

39 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

@Amentep

conan is a good example 'cause the character is public domain and anybody can (and has) made movies and comics and whatever using the character. just as robin hood is not 'bout the green tights errol flynn wore, is doubtful batman is gonna be limited by trappings once famous authors and artist can do their take, particular in a digital age when self publishing and the internet makes DC far less essential for an artist or author with an established following. how many draculas has there been? how many frankensteins? herclues? thors? 

heck, particular for the comic geeks, a frank miller batman, regardless if is dc or not, is unlikely to get a "knockoff" label as you describe. again, am suspecting is gonna be the artists, authors, actors and directors who create the appeal as 'posed to the trappings which has changed in fits and spurts over the many decades. the appeal o' a dc specific batman is not gonna be particular strong once a few talented people make their own product.  

HA! Good Fun!

ps please note smallville, hardly the best superman vehicle to grace modern media, existed for ten seasons on american tv while largely eschewing the trademark aspects o' comic superman. 

I wasn't necessarily referring to post-public domain use as 'knockoffs', but that people have been trading in knockoffs of these characters for years.  I know he's quit comics, but if you want to see what Alan Moore's run on Superman might have been like (outside of the three famous stories he did write for the character), you only need to look at his Supreme run (Supreme being Rob Liefeld's Superman knockoff).  I may be wrong  - I am on a lot of things - but I don't necessarily see there being a big rush to do Bruce Wayne-who-still-can't-have-the-trappings-of-Batman-iconography-or-non-PD-continuity that is greater than the number of creators who have, over the years, already done their version of Batman prior to any Public Doman considerations (Shadowhawk, Nightman, Midnighter, Black Fox, Moon Knight, Nighthawk, The Fixer, Bibleman, The Confessor, Darkwing Duck, Darkwing, The Owl, Catman, The Black Lion, Black Fury, etc).

There will be some, of course, but without the entirety of the continuity in the PD (something that is vastly different scenario to Dracula or Robin Hood), they're going to still have to forge a different direction for the character ... like the already existing knockoff characters did.  At least with the PD Oz book uses, they have 13 novels to base their Oz books on, even if they can't have the later Plumly-Thompson or Neil books from the original run which is a substantial amount of Baum character to play with.  It'll be something like 36 years or so after the first Detective Comics appearance before you can use the League of Shadows in your PD Batman stories and reclaim that origin for the character, and many Batman fans see that as a definitive aspect of the origin (particularly after its use in the Nolan films).  Sure, a big name creator can do a knockoff version of that origin...but then they already could do that with their knockoff-Batmans.

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Chairchucker said:

I'm assuming you don't genuinely think they would do any of those things, and are just using hyperbole.

 

If CRT were taught at schools, (which there is no evidence has ever been a thought, save for the scare tactics of ignorant Republican politicians) I'm not yet convinced that would be a bad thing. Same with open borders, unless you subscribe to Trump's racist 'they're rapists and criminals' nonsense, I just don't see what the issue would be. And, predictably being the Australian that I am, I definitely think gun control is something the US should have a crack at.

Open borders....you joking right ?

Which country in the world has open borders, once you give me those examples I can at least compare that to the US reality?

[Gromnir]

6 hours ago, Amentep said:

There will be some, of course, but without the entirety of the continuity in the PD (something that is vastly different scenario to Dracula or Robin Hood), they're going to still have to forge a different direction for the character ... like the already existing knockoff characters did.

the entire continuity? this isn't serious is it? the entirety o' the continuity o' a comic book character which has been around for decades, a continuity which most people is unaware and even those who do know will roll their eyes when reflecting 'pon. the "entire continuity" o' dracula is one novel 'bout half the length o' your average wot offering. entire continuity o' robin hood is gonna be the ****tail napkin depth o' the ordinary hollywood pitch. recall you brought up conan, yes? most people got no idea o' the continuity o' conan (only one novels and a bunch o' short stories), and am betting even amongst those who do care, virtual none is invested in the continuity o' conan from the comic books. 

kinda looking at it bass akwards on the continuity thing too. if a 2022 author or artist wants to do a batman story they need respect dc and get oks from the powers that be for any batman story they might wish to do. the prospective artist need functional pay for the opportunity to use the batman character and they must also be limited by those folks who is given power to decide which aspects o' the continuity is too precious to be altered or even explored. 

am suspecting the main obstacle the continuity provides to doing a public domain batman is the fact that unless you are a serious comic book geek, is unlikely you know all the batman stories and therefore is a fair chance whatever new batman story want to do may already have been done. needing comb through the continuity to make sure you ain't ripping off copyright by accident is gonna be a necessary annoyance for anybody desiring to do a new batman.

oh, and the iconic origin story is as you point out, known. is one aspect almost everybody knows already. the writer o' an aging batman story won't need explicit mention the trauma o' young bruce wayne. will be able to reference oblique to some kinda childhood trauma and is not gonna trigger trademark or copyright as is too vague, but audiences will know, just as they got a notion (often wrong) o' the origins and stories o' other iconic characters such as dracula. 

again, smallville did what you seem to think is problematic quite successful. sure, many iconic batman or superman stories and the weight o' their respective rogues gallery is gonna initial be off limits, but am thinking you way undersell the possibilities for those wanting to get in on the batman action once he hits public domain... and darkwing duck shoulda' been an indicator for you that perhaps you were reaching a bit to make a point which has now run pretty far afield o' the issues relevant to the politics thread. 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited April 5, 2022 by Gromnir

[Amentep]

I never said it was problematic (if I implied it it was unintentional).  I just don't think that when batman hits public domain there's going the bonanza to telling stories since many of the major creators already can (and some have) create knockoffs of these characters.  It'll be like a year before the theoretical PD Batman author can even use ROBIN and JOKER when Batman hits PD. 

That's why I think, in many ways, the fight for extending copyrights that Disney has done alluded to in the Florida fights Disney is probably a bit silly anyhow.  As you yourself mentioned, probably not a lot of people rushing out to create new stories based on Steamboat Willie.

[Gromnir]

55 minutes ago, Amentep said:

I never said it was problematic (if I implied it it was unintentional).  I just don't think that when batman hits public domain there's going the bonanza to telling stories since many of the major creators already can (and some have) create knockoffs of these characters.  It'll be like a year before the theoretical PD Batman author can even use ROBIN and JOKER when Batman hits PD. 

That's why I think, in many ways, the fight for extending copyrights that Disney has done alluded to in the Florida fights Disney is probably a bit silly anyhow.  As you yourself mentioned, probably not a lot of people rushing out to create new stories based on Steamboat Willie.

wow, need wait an additional year for joker... after near a century? a whole year? well that ends the discussion. 

*shrug*

and yeah, you did indeed observe how the inability to make use o' continuity and origin stories would be limits on a prospective user o' a public domain batman. is not as if somebody hypnotized you, so were also intentional. wanna quibble as to whether such qualifies as "problematic," then be our guest; am not gonna get into that level o' hair splitting. *chuckle* and folks accuse Gromnir o' indulging sophistry and semantics, eh?

once again, the steamboat willie example is what makes mickey and batman different. mickey is recognizable as an image more than a character. the reverse is true for batman. the visual trappings o' batman has dramatic changed over the decades, but there is aspects o' the character which has become ingrained in the public consciousnesses whether you are a comic book fan or not. you brought up the origin story o' batman, yes? is gonna be a noteworthy % o' the adult US population aware o' the origin stories o' batman and superman, which is precise why the author o' a new batman story won't need to reexamine yet again. what is the origin story and history of mickey mouse? if there is a mickey origin story, how many people care? the character o' mickey is not consequential to the ip the way that the characters o' superman and batman is. 

when steamboat willie becomes public domain, there won't be a rush to remake steamboat willie stories and you won't be able to sell coffee mugs with an image o' mickey on 'em just 'cause steamboat willie entered the public domain. converse, anybody who wants to do a batman story and not a knockoff is gonna have relative free reign to do so, and they won't need pay the copyright holder or licensee for the right to try. for the first time artists and authors will be free o' the continuity. 

batman, the character, is a far different animal from the mickey character. 

HA! Good Fun!

ps removed a repeat and added an "indulging"

Edited April 5, 2022 by Gromnir

[Amentep]

I don't think observing that what a lot of people think of as Batman would not be in the public domain because its from later, still protected stories as 'problematic', ie making doing it difficult to do, but something that'd just make it less attractive to do. Perhaps this seems like splitting hairs?

People will do it, I don't think it's going to have the major interest you do.

[Gromnir]

2 minutes ago, Amentep said:

I

so you do wanna split hairs? limitations v. problems? serious? fine. quibble away, but do so w/o our contribution.

am also not sure what constitutes "major interest." no doubt you will wanna precise define what that entails given the gulf you see 'tween limits and problems. regardless, to paraphrase, "we never said there would be major interest." 

in any event, am certain even amentep sees the difference 'tween the potential appeal to authors and artists o' having access to the steamboat willie character o' mickey v. batman once they enter public domain. intentional false equivalency? those who wanna slap the image o' mickey on a backpack to sell is not gonna be the same folks wanting to do a batman story w/o needing pay for the privilege to do so while simultaneous being constrained by the continuity. 

and with each response, we get further away and say less and less.

so it goes.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[BruceVC]

5 hours ago, Amentep said:

I don't think observing that what a lot of people think of as Batman would not be in the public domain because its from later, still protected stories as 'problematic', ie making doing it difficult to do, but something that'd just make it less attractive to do. Perhaps this seems like splitting hairs?

People will do it, I don't think it's going to have the major interest you do.

Amentep whats your opinion on changing the race of  superhero characters from white to black? I know this has been  discussed in the past but I want to get your current view

I am opposed to it because I dont think you need to change any established character for something to be financially successful. Black Panther is testimony to that outcome

The entertainment industry should create new black superheroes and if the characters are  memorable and exciting then the agency and success will be decided by peoples wallets the way it should be 

But I dont see the point of a black spider-man or black batman because the original characters werent black ?

[Chairchucker]

3 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Amentep whats your opinion on changing the race of  superhero characters from white to black? I know this has been  discussed in the past but I want to get your current view

I am opposed to it because I dont think you need to change any established character for something to be financially successful. Black Panther is testimony to that outcome

The entertainment industry should create new black superheroes and if the characters are  memorable and exciting then the agency and success will be decided by peoples wallets the way it should be 

But I dont see the point of a black spider-man or black batman because the original characters werent black ?

I know you didn't ask me BUT

 

I actually don't follow comics much, (love the movies though) but I get the impression that for some superheroes, mantles are frequently passed from one character to another.

 

For example, by far the most common Batman has Bruce Wayne as his alter ego (or vice versa, however that works) but others have also donned the cowl, most notably Richard (really, that one's censored?) Grayson.

AntMan has been the alter ego of Hank Pym, Scott Lang and Eric O'Grady.

Funny you should mention Spider-Man, because as well as Peter Parker, there is a black version of him; his name is Miles Morales. Other Spider-Men (Spider-Mans? Spiders-Man?) appear to include Ben Reilly, (a Parker clone) Mattie Franklin, (she apparently became Spider-woman once Peter Parker came back from retirement) and some alien or something (a member of the Vodu pantheon whatever that means) called Anansi who was supposedly the first ever Spider-Man.

People got mad when there was talk of Jane taking over from Thor, but I guess they were ignoring that the title of the God of Thunder had previously been held by a bunch of different other characters, including a frog looking dude called Beta Ray Bill.

One of my favourite examples because I like both characters and the TV show bearing the name: both Clint Barton and Kate Bishop are known as Hawkeye.

 

The comics seem to have a long history of weird alternate versions of heroes, baton passing etc, and heck, I think it's neat.

Edited April 6, 2022 by Chairchucker

[Chairchucker]

17 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Open borders....you joking right ?

Which country in the world has open borders, once you give me those examples I can at least compare that to the US reality?

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-open-borders

 

According to this:

Liechtenstein

Iceland

Malta

Luxembourg

Estonia

Latvia

Slovenia

Lithuania

Slovakia

Norway

Finland

Denmark

Switzerland

Austria

Hungary

Portugal

Sweden

Greece

Czech Republic

Belgium

Netherlands

Poland

Spain

Italy

France

Germany

 

[BruceVC]

4 minutes ago, Chairchucker said:

I know you didn't ask me BUT

 

I actually don't follow comics much, (love the movies though) but I get the impression that for some superheroes, mantles are frequently passed from one character to another.

 

For example, by far the most common Batman has Bruce Wayne as his alter ego (or vice versa, however that works) but others have also donned the cowl, most notably Richard (really, that one's censored?) Grayson.

AntMan has been the alter ego of Hank Pym, Scott Lang and Eric O'Grady.

Funny you should mention Spider-Man, because as well as Peter Parker, there is a black version of him; his name is Miles Morales. Other Spider-Men (Spider-Mans? Spiders-Man?) appear to include Ben Reilly, (a Parker clone) Mattie Franklin, (she apparently became Spider-woman once Peter Parker came back from retirement) and some alien or something (a member of the Vodu pantheon whatever that means) called Anansi who was supposedly the first ever Spider-Man.

People got mad when there was talk of Jane taking over from Thor, but I guess they were ignoring that the title of the God of Thunder had previously been held by a bunch of different other characters, including a frog looking dude called Beta Ray Bill.

One of my favourite examples because I like both characters and the TV show bearing the name: both Clint Barton and Kate Bishop are known as Hawkeye.

 

The comics seem to have a long history of weird alternate versions of heroes, baton passing etc, and heck, I think it's neat.

I always like to get anyone's opinion on any question I ask so its great you sharing your view on this

Cancel culture and culture wars I find are more of  a US contagion that is fueled by their endless  political dichotomy and  we all  sometimes tend to get pulled into those unhelpful debates  in many of our countries so my question is not about anything related to that. I know you not suggesting this but this is how some people respond to that  question

You make some good points but its hard to see my concern if you not a fan of comics and certain characters and the symbolism. Their shouldnt be a need to change the original race of anyone, you can create new characters and those can become loved and admired

But I agree mantles in comics do get handed over and I have no  issue with that in the case of Bruce Wayne retires and he hands over to a Hispanic, Chinese or black new Batman

But I would object to a female Thor because Thor is the son of Odin and he is a man and thats based on the accurate Norse mythology 

 

[BruceVC]

12 minutes ago, Chairchucker said:

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-open-borders

 

According to this:

Liechtenstein

Iceland

Malta

Luxembourg

Estonia

Latvia

Slovenia

Lithuania

Slovakia

Norway

Finland

Denmark

Switzerland

Austria

Hungary

Portugal

Sweden

Greece

Czech Republic

Belgium

Netherlands

Poland

Spain

Italy

France

Germany

 

Yes but thats not the same thing, thats the EU and it has border control trust me 

[Chairchucker]

5 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

You make some good points but its hard to see my concern if you not a fan of comics and certain characters and the symbolism. Their shouldnt be a need to change the original race of anyone, you can create new characters and those can become loved and admired

I suppose that's theoretically possible, (and I'm excited for some of the more diverse heroes we're getting in the MCU now) but established heroes seem to get more attention. Just checked Wikipedia's  list of theatrically released live action DC films, for example, and there appears to be 9 Batman movies, 6 Superman movies, a Batman vs Superman movie, and 17 others. When there are slightly more movies starring Batman or Superman than there are DC films not starring either, and of those 17, one prominently features both, (Justice League) and three more star Batman villains, (Catwoman, Jokes and Harley Quinn + Birds of Prey) it's clear that the people with the licenses think different iterations on the established heroes are the way to go.

[BruceVC]

5 minutes ago, Chairchucker said:

I suppose that's theoretically possible, (and I'm excited for some of the more diverse heroes we're getting in the MCU now) but established heroes seem to get more attention. Just checked Wikipedia's  list of theatrically released live action DC films, for example, and there appears to be 9 Batman movies, 6 Superman movies, a Batman vs Superman movie, and 17 others. When there are slightly more movies starring Batman or Superman than there are DC films not starring either, and of those 17, one prominently features both, (Justice League) and three more star Batman villains, (Catwoman, Jokes and Harley Quinn + Birds of Prey) it's clear that the people with the licenses think different iterations on the established heroes are the way to go.

But surly the race of the superhero has to be accurate to the history of the character

So for example, Clark Kent came from Krypton. If the next Superman became Mongolian that would be weird and incongruous to his history?