I'm in the grip of Bat-mania v3.0 like the rest of the nation, but have always been curious-- why Batman?

What makes him so much more popular than 99.9% of the superheroes out there? He seems relatively simple; he's just a dude who beats up criminals using his wits and gadgets. The Shadow and Zorro and Doc Savage all had that motif but they're pretty much footnotes at this point in history and Batman keeps chugging along, this time shattering box office records like he did in 1989-- almost 20 years ago.

Is it the Bat costume? The fact that he's one of the first superheroes?

What's the deal?

Batman is just plain cool.

The Bat-imagery is very primal and memorable. He can appear in silhouette or as a shadow and you'll still know exactly who he is. Plus, he's been extremely adaptable, changing with the times and becoming the hero that the public wants to see then. Yet somehow, he's still the same character as he's always been.

And he's cool.

No Powers

One of the First

Costume

Great tragic origin, too. As Denny O'Neil and Kevin Conroy put it on the Gotham Knight commentary, he's Hamlet as a superhero.

It all goes back to the Adam West series. That's what put Batman in the pop-culture nostalgia cycle. Every twenty years he makes a comeback and recruits another generation of fans.

The Adam West program played to TV watching kids and the adults that read Batman comics as kids. Burton had the Adam West audience built-in, added the kids of the 80's/90's. Now we're seeing those three generations of bat-mania veterans being joined by a fourth. In twenty years I would suggest that presidential candidates consider appearing at their debates wearing a cape and cowl.

Without the Adam West series, Burton's movie would've done Rocketeer size numbers.

Exactly. The answer to "Why Batman?" is, and will always be, Adam West.

Batman was always great Linda, I'm sorry, but this is just how I feel.

Though the Adam West era Batman was terrific, I won't lie, some great stuff.

He might have always been great. There were kids reading Batman and Robin before I was born. I just doubt that Pop Culture Icon status would exist for Batman without Adam West.

For you. Not everyone is you.

As I might have mentioned before, I loathe that TV show a whole flipping lot. That said, I do still love Batman as a character.

So Adam West is not a universal answer to the "Why Batman?" question. You love Adam West? Great. Shiny. Enjoy. But he's not the key to the character's appeal across the board.

Word.

And even if Batman's cross-media appeal stems from the 60's show, there were a lot of people who helped make that show what it was. Adam West was a great actor for the role, but we still needed the writers, directors and other talented actors involved.

Sure. Adam West is shorthand. We can say the '66 TV series if you prefer.

I gotcha.

I do prefer that.

Don't underestimate "Timm/Dini" either.

I think Timm/Dini is the best Batman by far. That said, I think it didn't have as much to do with Batman's popularity as the '66 show and the first Burton film. By the time TAS was on the air, Batman was already an icon.

Part of being an icon, though is having that status sustained. In the 50s Zorro was a popular icon, as was the Lone Ranger. Now, not so much. Batman got a boost from the Burton films, but it's the Timm/Dini cartoon that sustained that through the 90s and through the implosion of the first film series.

Well, it definitely introduced him to children of the 90's. I remember babysitting a kid during this period and he was absolutely ga-ga over thast thing. Even had an adorable Batman costume he wore.

He (and the series he is shorthand for) may well have had significant historical impact on the survival of the Batman legend/meme into the seventies - damaged as it was, from my perspective. But he really has no direct influence (and probably little indirect influence) on why I like Batman. Really, that series seems almost antithetical to what I like about the character. And maybe I'm atypical, but I'm guessing he also has little influence over people who discovered Batman later than, what, 1968 or so? Or later, depending on local rerun availability.

On the other hand, the few 50's-era Batman stories I've read seem to suck wind. Along with pretty much all other mainstream comics from that time period, IMO - nothing special about Batman in this respect. (Feel free to point out what I've overlooked.) I guess I'm just spoiled by what came later. So I suppose I can see the Adam West series as a medium-sized step up in quality, and a large step up in public exposure, compared to what came before. But I sure am glad they didn't stop there.

Timm/Dini would be the One True Answer here, as far as I'm concerned. Even if it mostly postdates my own interest in the character.

Batman debuts in 1939 - and is a HUGE hit

Batman comes to TV in 1966 - and is a HUGE hit

Batman comes to the Movies in 1989 - And is a HUGE hit

Batman returns to animation in 1990 - and is a HUGE hit

Batman returns to the movies in 2008 - and is a HUGE hit


Hmmm I think maybe the character of Batman is strong enough and flexible enough to always strike a chord when handled with enthusiasm - no one take is responsible for his success.