# CBR Community  > Comics Should Be Good >  Why do we read superhero comics as opposed to Star Trek?

## Green Lantern wannabe

I sorta know the answer, but I'm hoping others can elaborate it for me, so I can get it clear in my head.

I'm a long time member of this forum, and I like my DC comics, especially Batman, Green Lantern and, after the Robert Downey Jr movies, Iron Man. But I'm more a hard-core science fiction fan than a superhero fan, and I like the intellectual concepts inherent in that genre. Star Trek, of course, is the leading mass media example of that, when the writers ask, "What If?" as in, what if there was an alternate universe (the dark mirror episodes), or what if we had genetically-engineered humans (Khan Noonian Singh). 

Yes, superhero comics can also deal with serious issues, like arms dealing (Iron Man 1) or the corruption of the military-industrial complex (the original Robocop movie). But, while we can accept ourselves in a starship warping at faster-than-light speeds, we cannot accept a person putting on a cape and flying, or, for that matter, women showing cleavage and beating up on the bad guys. And yet we like them.

I'm asking because I'm thinking of doing some writing, which I've been wanting to do for many years, and, yes, I'm thinking of the superhero genre. 

So why do we like superheroes in tights and capes?

----------


## Killerbee911

American comics at some point became seen as kid thing, And industry hasn't full break that stigma.This is important because scifi gets complex and mature and doesn't fit age bracket/audience comics are going after. Whereas Manga in Japan isn't aimed at specific audience and doesn't have stigma like the US. So all sorts of genre and content are available in comic form and read by adults.

American Comics can deal with serious issue but the American market has been train view to comics for kids, So you will never get push for that type of content(scifi) until American market makes serious turn at adults. That said the american indie market supports wider variety of subject matter so if you are thinking of writing comic and doing scifi you actually have place for that.

Why do we like Superhero comics? Great wish fulfilment with fantastic things happening and they have really good stories of good versus evil in this format

----------


## Green Lantern wannabe

> Why do we like Superhero comics? Great wish fulfilment with fantastic things happening and they have really good stories of good versus evil in this format


Thanks for your input. I think this has a great deal to do with it, because, when I was in my teens - a long time ago - I had the fantasy of going out and being a superhero after school. And this would be different from most sci-fi because a super hero has powers that typically come from his body, as opposed to a sci-fi hero using a spaceship.

Yes, there are exceptions, like, say, Batman, but, even then, his utility belt is with him at all times, and his adventures often don't center around the Batmobile. Star Trek, by contrast, center around a space ship while Babylon 5 center around a space station. Again, there are exceptions, like the Matrix, but the best sci fi involve a universe or surrounding, where there is a scientific or technological difference from our world. 

I'm fleshing out the answer, which I've an intuitive sense of, so, everyone, please chime in.  :Smile:

----------


## KyCoo

Personally, I never was a big fan of the Star Trek universe. I started reading the DC comics and my all-time favorite superhero is The Flash. So I never really thought of reading Star Trek. I've watched the series though.

----------


## Green Lantern wannabe

> Personally, I never was a big fan of the Star Trek universe. I started reading the DC comics and my all-time favorite superhero is The Flash. So I never really thought of reading Star Trek. I've watched the series though.


Thanks, my friend. I think the idea of wish-fulfillment is central to why we read comics, but why do you like the Flash?

----------


## BruceWayneJr.

I like them both but there's just more volume with superheroes. If I don't like the one Star Trek comic put out that month, I have 50 some-odd new superhero books as an alternative.

----------


## Green Lantern wannabe

> I like them both but there's just more volume with superheroes. If I don't like the one Star Trek comic put out that month, I have 50 some-odd new superhero books as an alternative.


Yes, there's far more volume with superhero comics, and I had a thread on this forum about that quite awhile ago. But what attracts you to superheroes as opposed to science fiction?

I like them because it's a personal fantasy, as in the individual having powers that others don't have and being able to go out and do things by himself. There's some literature out there, of the politician like Winston Churchill or JFK, being the lone gun fighter who goes out to save the people under him, and there's something about this in our sub conscious.

----------


## Uncanny Mutie

Because Star Trek is boring as hell.

----------


## BeastieRunner

I love supers and am ambivalent to Star Trek BUT ...

I think Trek has handled the heavy themes 100x better than the best super hero stuff to date.

----------


## Green Lantern wannabe

> ]I think Trek has handled the heavy themes 100x better than the best super hero stuff to date.


I agree, which leads to the question of why we would read super hero instead of ST. I think, as someone said, it's wish fulfillment, as in, I'm a superhero, someone special, as opposed to a flunky in uniform on a star ship.

Thanks for your input.  :Smile:

----------


## Starter Set

> I think Trek has handled the heavy themes 100x better than the best super hero stuff to date.


No question there.

----------


## SJNeal

> I agree, which leads to the question of why we would read super hero instead of ST. I think, as someone said, it's wish fulfillment, as in, I'm a superhero, someone special, as opposed to a flunky in uniform on a star ship.
> 
> Thanks for your input.


I think more people would rather have the ability to level a city with their thoughts (or fists, or breath) than they would the opportunity to live in a utopian society.   :Smile:

----------


## BeastieRunner

> I agree, which leads to the question of why we would read super hero instead of ST. I think, as someone said, it's wish fulfillment, as in, I'm a superhero, someone special, as opposed to a flunky in uniform on a star ship.
> 
> Thanks for your input.


Wish fulfillment. Even some of the heavy stuff is rather light.

Humor. Lots of intentional and unintentional humor.

Brevity. You can pop in out of super stories relatively easily compared to Star Trek.

Longevity. Supers have been around a long time.

Nostalgia. Most kids aren't exposed to Star Trek till they're much older whereas with supers, you probably had a favorite growing up.

----------


## Jon Clark

I just like individual heroes.

I'm not as fond of guys who are part of a homogeneous team.  Give me a single guy with laser vision over a bunch of guys with energy rifles.  Or a one-man army trying to defeat his foes on his own over deputized agents who are bound by red-tape and prime directives.  And I suspend my disbelief easier for that lone hero with the bow and arrow than I do for that SWAT team of guys with interchangeable modern weapons.

----------


## Green Lantern wannabe

> I just like individual heroes.
> 
> I'm not as fond of guys who are part of a homogeneous team.  Give me a single guy with laser vision over a bunch of guys with energy rifles.  Or a one-man army trying to defeat his foes on his own over deputized agents who are bound by red-tape and prime directives.  And I suspend my disbelief easier for that lone hero with the bow and arrow than I do for that SWAT team of guys with interchangeable modern weapons.


I think that's the crux of the issue, Jon Clark. The superhero is a lone gun fighter or swordsman, going out to fight evil all by himself, which has been part of our mythos for untold millenia. And many of my favourite stories do involve a superhero going off by himself. Despite my onscreen name, my favourite hero is Batman, but even Hal Jordan was often a lone green lantern, despite being a member of a corps.

----------


## Hatut Zeraze

> I think more people would rather have the ability to level a city with their thoughts (or fists, or breath) than they would the opportunity to live in a utopian society.


After the last two years, I can say, without hesitation, I would rather have the opportunity to live in a utopian society.

----------


## SJNeal

> After the last two years, I can say, without hesitation, I would rather have the opportunity to live in a utopian society.


Anyone who's brain functions at a higher level than a chimpanzee's *should* prefer that option, but that's just IMHO...   :Wink:

----------


## Green Lantern wannabe

> Anyone who's brain functions at a higher level than a chimpanzee's *should* prefer that option, but that's just IMHO...


The Chinese have a curse, "May you live in interesting times". We fantasize about living lives that we would never want to go through - who wants to lose his parents, get traumatized, then put on a mask and risk his life beating up on criminals?

----------


## From The Shadows

I'm a fan of both Superheroes and Star Trek and have been since I was a kid. I've also read Star Trek comics and tbh, the quality is not that good. I think if they can get decent artists and find a writer that doesn't bore you to tears it could really take off.

----------


## SJNeal

> I'm a fan of both Superheroes and Star Trek and have been since I was a kid. I've also read Star Trek comics and tbh, the quality is not that good. I think if they can get decent artists and find a writer that doesn't bore you to tears it could really take off.


Yeah, for all of its output, IDW's offerings have always been mediocre at best.  I think the last time I truly enjoyed ST comics was when Wildstorm was doing them briefly in the early 00's.

----------


## From The Shadows

> Yeah, for all of its outpur, IDW's offering have always been mediocre at best.  I think the last time I truly enjoyed ST comics was when Wildstorm was doing them briefly in the early 00's.


I gave Wildstorm's TNG a try and granted the art was a lot better than the DC TNG comics years prior and the stories were an improvement. Now DS9's Marvel and Malibu comics were better in art and story and Garak was allowed to be the pansexual man that Andrew Robinson wanted to portray him as when he was introduced during his meeting with Bashir. Shortly after Robinson was asked to tone it down. The comics writer and Marvel didn't seem to have the same concerns as Paramount. The book still had its problems, though. I bought the _Devided We Fall_ DS9/TNG crossover comic and liked some bits and the art was pretty good. It expanded on the Ezri Dax/Julian Bashir relationship that we only got a glimpse of in the final season of the show (and of course they break up later in the novels for realism as usual). But I can't help but think it could have been done in 1 issue. It was just stretched out too long with not much going on, really,  to warrant 4 issues. 

I really love the art here. The artist was able to make them look exactly like their show counterparts while still being comic art. Past attempts of actor/actress likeness were very stiff IMO and just didn't have the boldness that comic art should have. The writer also seemed to have a good grasp on the characters. 







Now when IDW announced a comic that would focus on Data's return and a DS9 mini-series I was so happy. Because IDW has had a good track record of adapting loved tv/film properties successfully. But, that was not the case with these. Suffice to say Data's return and _Fools Gold_ was, like many previous Trek comics, extremely boring. Even more boring then prior attempts and I didn't think that was possible. How the hell did IDW get this wrong? Usually what they touch becomes gold. IDW and Trek should have been the perfect match.

----------


## CaptCleghorn

> I love supers and am ambivalent to Star Trek BUT ...
> 
> I think Trek has handled the heavy themes 100x better than the best super hero stuff to date.


Trek, despite its hundreds of hours of broadcasts, is far more focused than superhero comics.  With a variety of style, titles, and characters, superhero comics can't focus on anything excpet that they're all kinda superheroey.  That leaves a lot of superhero comics that don't even try to hit the focus Trek was taking.  And those that did were the result of many sources.  Some actually did a good job of covering heavy thems.  Others not so much.  Everything has its crap.  Look at TOS season 3 and Star Trek V.

As to why we might prefer Superhero comics to trek, I think superhero comics expand the imagination more and put us into the picture better than a story set hundreds of years in the future.  I'm a fan of both and although I like a greater percentage of Trek than I do superhero comics, I can't really pick which I like better.  But both can use more intense themes disguised in a science fiction motif.  Superhero comics just don't always do that.

----------


## C_Miller

> I love supers and am ambivalent to Star Trek BUT ...
> 
> I think Trek has handled the heavy themes 100x better than the best super hero stuff to date.


I love both pretty much equally. Star Trek was my first love and superheroes probably came not too far after, but I'm not sure I'd really agree with that. Star Trek can be very heavy handed and even when I agree with the message, which is usually, it can be pretty cringy. Everyone likes to bring up the episode with Frank Gorshin where it had the people with the black and white faces and it showed the silliness of racism. It's a great message... but the episode handles it with about as much subtlety as a marching band. Most of the other message episodes don't get better. TNG usually attacks messages from a place of such arrogance that I sometimes find it hard to agree with their conclusions even if I agree. That's not to say they're all like that, but I find most of the people who really like to focus on the heavy themes of Star Trek often times don't really watch Star Trek.

Superheroes aren't perfect either and maybe even worse than Star Trek on a regular basis, but when they hit, they hit.

----------


## Sutekh

Most superhero comics are 'me' fantasies.  Batman does X.  Spider-Man does Y.

Star Trek, in particular, is a team oriented franchise.  There have been few, if any, significant solo stories, since it's generally at least an away team or bridge crew working together, if not the entire ship or station, that saves the day, not just 'the amazing solo adventures of Data.'  

As such, superheroes make for a good selfish sort of personal power fantasy.  Daredevil fights alone.  Superman *can* be part of the Justice League, but I can also read stories in which he stands alone against various forces of evil or threats to Earth.  If I don't want to read a team book, I don't have to, I can read about the adventures of one single person, making a difference, and that's a different taste.

I personally prefer team books, sometimes about younger heroes, sometimes adults, sometimes the elder generation (Legion of Super-Heroes, Teen Titans, Young Justice, Justice Society, etc. from DC, Runaways, Agents of Atlas, New X-Men, Avengers Academy, etc. from Marvel), and also am a bigger fan of Star Trek (which feels more '*we*' oriented and 'the whole team won' than, say, Star Wars, where the single very special chosen person with the most Midichlorian junk in their trunk wins the day), but I can see how the 'me' team has it's appeal, with characters who aren't just a cog in a wheel and don't have to share the glory.  That said, even Star Trek has it's 'me' episodes, particularly when Kirk is involved, as he sometimes ends up alone saving the day.  The classic episode with him vs. the Gorn captain would be a fine example, as it might as well have been a Kirk standalone story, with the crew forced to watch on TV as he fought alone.

----------


## GOLGO 13

One is highly simplistic entertainment with daddy wish fulfillment fantasies focused mostly to market more toys. 

The other is more nuanced & doesn't hide from complex & thought provoking issues.  Star Trek toys have always sucked & displaying them makes you look like a super-nerdy tool.

----------


## Xheight

Star Trek Fan and passionate comic fan whose favorite heroes are very science fiction based (except Dr. Strange) Iron Man and FF. 
So I get where the OP is coming from but it seems more true over years that, from its origins to today's most engaging stories, SuperHero fiction is exactly what wikipedia says "speculative fiction examining the adventures, personalities and ethics of costumed crime fighters" or as someone once pointed out if Science fiction is the fiction of ideas surrounding science and technology then SuperHeroes are the ground work for thinking about power, crime and consequence in a modern age of new powers and situations that are extra-ordinary.  

We see this in the pulp origins of supers fighting crime that regular cops (read as regular society) are not able to deal with.  And while Star Trek and other sci-fi deal in ethical situations and crimes most often these involve ideas inherent in the tech or conduct of science not the human conduct or motives of people given power.  

So what is it that we are talking about when the topic of wish fulfillment comes up and is not the but main driver of Science Fiction? 
I would say it is still Justice.  The idea that power be in the hands of the righteous or that there is a balance in the Universe for the abuses of power. That Crime does not pay as they used to say in the old Shadow radio serials.

----------


## PwrdOn

I suppose that Star Trek is more thought provoking than most geek media, but this doesn't exactly work in its favor because once you do start thinking about the deeper meanings and implications of what they're talking about, you quickly discover that it's just as nonsensical and incoherent as anything you'd find in comics.  Though to be fair, comics sort of lean too far in the other direction of not trying to explain or rationalize anything.  I suppose the best speculative fiction finds a good middle ground where it gives you the impression of something profound, but throws a big explosion in your face whenever you start thinking about it too hard.  A great example of this is the Mass Effect series which pulled this off beautifully, at least until the ending to 3 ruined it all.

----------


## Xheight

> I suppose that Star Trek is more thought provoking than most geek media, but this doesn't exactly work in its favor because once you do start thinking about the deeper meanings and implications of what they're talking about, you quickly discover that it's just as nonsensical and incoherent as anything you'd find in comics.  Though to be fair, comics sort of lean too far in the other direction of not trying to explain or rationalize anything.  I suppose the best speculative fiction finds a good middle ground where it gives you the impression of something profound, but throws a big explosion in your face whenever you start thinking about it too hard.  A great example of this is the Mass Effect series which pulled this off beautifully, at least until the ending to 3 ruined it all.


I think you have to factor in what expectations are of who the audience is. Creators and especially collaborative media creators are also worried that they will lose or speak over the head of their masses.  I think you can see how that changed from Star Trek to Next Generation as the idea of what the attention span is grew.

----------


## stargazer01

Well superheroes  originated in comicbooks and the themes are based on action, adventure, super powers and good vs evil.  

Star Trek started as a thought-provoking and science-based TV show.  Seems more mature oriented than pure escapism.  It can be both, sure, but superheroes are pure wish-fulfillment and seem more populist to me.

----------


## MyriVerse

The superhero genre is typically more free and open to elements of fantasy and horror, as well as, science fiction.

----------


## A Small Talent For War

> The superhero genre is typically more free and open to elements of fantasy and horror, as well as, science fiction.


It's changing with the manga influence as well as a lot of properties that began as cartoons becoming comics as well. It will be interesting to see how things develop, but the main reason we read superhero comics over most others is that for most readers, superheroes were pretty much only common in comic books. 

Star Trek was, and mostly still is, something you watch on television. Star Wars you watched in movie theaters or on the television. Before the comics code, comics were still for kids, but horror comics, war comics, romance comics and science fiction comics were just as popular as super-heroes. After the code, the other genres migrated to other media and superheroes became even more aimed at children, like Saturday morning cartoons. 

Then, when comics exploded in popularity really in the 80's, it was because of the appeal to teenager and young college age students - mostly boys. Teen Titans and the New X-men especially. Today, you get a lot of comparison between the X-Men and minorities, but really they're appeal was that the mutant experience mirrored adolescence.

When most people are little kids, they are cute, harmless and everyone loves them. Then, when they reach their teens, they stop being cute, people who loved them now get angry with them, their bodies change in scary ways, they face judgment from strangers and, worst of all, they feel dangerous. They can get pregnant or get someone pregnant, get into a car accident, hurt someone in a fight. They feel like freaks - and the way New X-men and Teen Titans were written - with terrific artwork, too - really spoke to that. 

So, that's when a great deal of comics readers developed a strong emotional connection to the medium and associated it with the superhero genre - and those were the readers who would then go into comics and create a lot of the independent publishers like Image, too. So the entire medium was geared to deliver superheroes even as it became more mature.

----------


## Cyberstrike

I don't think escapist fun can't have something serious to say. My first love is and always be the _Transformers_ but does that mean it's just big alien robots who change forms and beating the crap out of each other? No, writer James Roberts used the comic book _The Transformers: More Than Meets the Eye_to introduce and explore several big issues such as PTSD, same-sex romance, transgender issues, faith vs. atheism, politics, characters who fall from grace, stories of redemption, the nature of heroism and villainy, and still have a wickedly funny and at times very brutally violent series about alien robots who change forms and beat the crap out each other.

----------


## captchuck

I don't like when everybody wears the same outfit. Fantastic Four almost has that problem, but thing is mostly orange and the Torch is red a good part of the time and Sue is often invisible.

----------


## scilover

i cant watch superheroes like Superman (dont batch me, this is personal opinion :')), where the power basically normal and basic. Having good strength, flying.
I'm more into like weird superpower like spiderman, hulk, xmen etc.

----------


## Zelena

Here is an article from a journalist who has grown tired of super-heroes stories:

Superhero movies have never seemed more obscene

I must say I understand her point of view. I mostly read super-heroes comics when I was a child and I never heard of Climate Change, biodiversity loss, ressource depletion… Have we really the luxury to lose ourselves in fantasy with so many pressing threats? Is it a nostalgia of simpler times?

----------


## Gotham citizen

> […]
> Superhero movies have never seemed more obscene
> […]


I quote from the paper: «They might save cinema, but the public doesn’t need vengeance and spandex right now – we need voting and vaccines.»
Can someone explain to that "journalist" the simply concept of entertainment and why it is so important when we live in dark times?

About the topic of the thread I would answer with a question: «Why do we eat fish-burger as opposed to fish & chips?» Because they are totally different things, able to satisfy different tastes and the fact that both of them contain fish, doesn't make them interchangeable. This is why we can prefer the fish-burger or the fish & chips, but we can also choose to love both of them and eat a time the first one and another time the second ones.

----------


## Duskman

> Here is an article from a journalist who has grown tired of super-heroes stories:
> 
> Superhero movies have never seemed more obscene
> 
> I must say I understand her point of view. I mostly read super-heroes comics when I was a child and I never heard of Climate Change, biodiversity loss, resource depletion Have we really the luxury to lose ourselves in fantasy with so many pressing threats? Is it a nostalgia of simpler times?


Humans cannot live on constant existential anxiety alone.

----------


## Zelena

> Humans cannot live on constant existential anxiety alone.


But once they have been lulled by this false sense of security, do they want to go back in this existantial anxiety? Or they are tempted to say: Oh, maybe, its not so serious, after all, its not the end of the world, right now. Lets go back to movies, comics

Or if they are convinced that the situation is serious, dont they feel guilty to have wasted precious time?

----------


## Gotham citizen

> […]
> Or if they are convinced that the situation is serious, don’t they feel guilty to have wasted precious time?


Absolutely not: the people has to amuse themselves in order to cheer themselves up. For example a common reaction to the pestilence of the thirteenth century (which killed about the forty percent of the European population) was write the so called Macrabe Dances; one example of these dances was recorded by the Italian singer Angelo Branduardi.




We aren't living something that the humanity always faced.

----------


## A Small Talent For War

Exactly, just look at the movies in the 30's and it is clear people went to the cinema to escape Depression. Almost always, the answer to why people go to any form of entertainment is that they just want to feel good for a little while.

----------


## ed2962

> Exactly, just look at the movies in the 30's and it is clear people went to the cinema to escape Depression. Almost always, the answer to why people go to any form of entertainment is that they just want to feel good for a little while.


True. But there were a lot of gangster movies at the time. As well as Charlie Chaplin's Little Tramp character directly dealt with the poverty of the times. Everything wasn't pure escapism.

----------


## Zelena

> True. But there were a lot of gangster movies at the time. As well as Charlie Chaplin's Little Tramp character directly dealt with the poverty of the times. Everything wasn't pure escapism.


Yes, but Charlie Chaplin made fun of poverty He was saying: yes, this is your life, its bleak but you can still find in it reasons to be happy. You feel stronger after seeing his movies. The world is less terrifying.
If something is too distant from your day-to-day life, once you go back to the reality, you just think: Here we go again. And nothing has changed in your vision of life.

So, Marvel or Stark Trek? Depends. Spider-man has always been much loved and nobody has been biten by a radioactive spider.

----------


## A Small Talent For War

> Yes, but Charlie Chaplin made fun of poverty… He was saying: yes, this is your life, it’s bleak but you can still find in it reasons to be happy. You feel stronger after seeing his movies. The world is less terrifying.
> If something is too distant from your day-to-day life, once you go back to the reality, you just think: “Here we go again.” And nothing has changed in your vision of life.
> 
> So, Marvel or Stark Trek? Depends. Spider-man has always been much loved and nobody has been biten by a radioactive spider.


It is strange how the essential adolescent drama of Spider-Man often works so well. Buffy had a lot of the same appeal because the supernatural elements were just a little off from the way we dealt with the world as teens. Stephen King makes this point with horror. He believes that even though child-eating magical clowns may be obvious fantasy, there is something in your subconscious that says "if you just changed this a little bit, it's just like the real world" and that's what really makes it scary.

With Spider-Man in the 60's and the X-men in the 80's, superheroes mirrored the strange experience of adolescence where you start to see how socially and physically scary the world really is compared to childhood - in which you were powerless but protected (unless you had a terrible childhood) - but at the same time you are becoming physically and mentally more capable of dealing with the dangers of the world and the society you're entering. A lot of this was reflected in how the golden age heroes had much stronger appeal for pre-teens where the experience of being powerless attracted kids to stories of very powerful heroes, while the Marvel and Bronze Age comics appealed to a more older teenage reader.

----------


## Xheight

> American comics at some point became seen as kid thing, And industry hasn't full break that stigma.This is important because scifi gets complex and mature and doesn't fit age bracket/audience comics are going after. Whereas Manga in Japan isn't aimed at specific audience and doesn't have stigma like the US. So all sorts of genre and content are available in comic form and read by adults.
> 
> American Comics can deal with serious issue but the American market has been train view to comics for kids, So you will never get push for that type of content(scifi) until American market makes serious turn at adults. That said the american indie market supports wider variety of subject matter so if you are thinking of writing comic and doing scifi you actually have place for that.
> 
> Why do we like Superhero comics? Great wish fulfilment with fantastic things happening and they have really good stories of good versus evil in this format


Well let us not forget that US comics were for a long time policed as being kids content after a horrid period of controlling content from becoming adult.   Starlin for one is able to write what he did as the code became less enforced and that stigma began to wane.

----------


## Xheight

> It is strange how the essential adolescent drama of Spider-Man often works so well. Buffy had a lot of the same appeal because the supernatural elements were just a little off from the way we dealt with the world as teens. Stephen King makes this point with horror. He believes that even though child-eating magical clowns may be obvious fantasy, there is something in your subconscious that says "if you just changed this a little bit, it's just like the real world" and that's what really makes it scary.
> 
> With Spider-Man in the 60's and the X-men in the 80's, superheroes mirrored the strange experience of adolescence where you start to see how socially and physically scary the world really is compared to childhood - in which you were powerless but protected (unless you had a terrible childhood) - but at the same time you are becoming physically and mentally more capable of dealing with the dangers of the world and the society you're entering. A lot of this was reflected in how the golden age heroes had much stronger appeal for pre-teens where the experience of being powerless attracted kids to stories of very powerful heroes, while the Marvel and Bronze Age comics appealed to a more older teenage reader.


Marvel had a college age appeal in the late sixties so the age assignment for those dramas is perhaps confining.

----------


## 80sForever

> Here is an article from a journalist who has grown tired of super-heroes stories:
> 
> Superhero movies have never seemed more obscene
> 
> I must say I understand her point of view. I mostly read super-heroes comics when I was a child and I never heard of Climate Change, biodiversity loss, ressource depletion Have we really the luxury to lose ourselves in fantasy with so many pressing threats? Is it a nostalgia of simpler times?


Your words also seem to be implying that we ought not read super-hero comics because the society sucks? Like I can actually change society and it is my moral obligation to stop pollution? That's one high horse. Humans are wired to play games. Stop judging us.

On a related note:

When supers try to solve fundamental problems on earth, time and time again they are depicted as overstepping their bounds (Squadron Supreme, Emperor Doom, Watchmen, The Authority, etc.).

You may have no problems with Superman destroying all nukes, overthrowing North Korea, or fixing carbon emissions- and in fact, the Golden Age Superman did declare war on crooked politicians, traffic, and gambling. But the sheer majority of writers and readers know that Superman would be anointing himself a god if he tried to stop China from overfishing. At best this stuff works with heroes like Animal Man or Aquaman.

Not sure why you never heard of climate change as a kid. Earth Day was celebrated at my school in the 1980s, and let's not forget Captain Planet in 1990.

----------


## CosmiComic

I wouldn't go so far as to say Superman doing those things to some degree makes him problematic. That's just an assumption comics writers make

But I don't at all get the idea of forgetting about climate change when we read superhero comics. makes no sense at all. People have never cared more about the environment than now.

----------


## jwatson

> I sorta know the answer, but I'm hoping others can elaborate it for me, so I can get it clear in my head.
> 
> I'm a long time member of this forum, and I like my DC comics, especially Batman, Green Lantern and, after the Robert Downey Jr movies, Iron Man. But I'm more a hard-core science fiction fan than a superhero fan, and I like the intellectual concepts inherent in that genre. Star Trek, of course, is the leading mass media example of that, when the writers ask, "What If?" as in, what if there was an alternate universe (the dark mirror episodes), or what if we had genetically-engineered humans (Khan Noonian Singh). 
> 
> Yes, superhero comics can also deal with serious issues, like arms dealing (Iron Man 1) or the corruption of the military-industrial complex (the original Robocop movie). But, while we can accept ourselves in a starship warping at faster-than-light speeds, we cannot accept a person putting on a cape and flying, or, for that matter, women showing cleavage and beating up on the bad guys. And yet we like them.
> 
> I'm asking because I'm thinking of doing some writing, which I've been wanting to do for many years, and, yes, I'm thinking of the superhero genre. 
> 
> So why do we like superheroes in tights and capes?


I love Star Trek personally but i wouldn't buy a star trek comic because for me the amount of information and data given in the shows just does not translate well and the visuals are not as exciting as what can be done in other mediums. So in terms of comics i usually steer clear of space stuff besides this latest GOTG run but i've watched all the Star Treks including Picard, Below Deck, and Discovery and loved them all. I have also watched Far Scape and use to like Star Wars but the prequels ruined it for me, i couldn't get past the idea that the past had way better tech than the future and then all of a sudden it was back to how it use to look (which was the right choice) but with no real expectation.

As far as super hero comics i am not particularly tied to them besides mutants i guess which would be more of a personal connection as my 5th grade art teacher was obsessed with the xmen and had a huge banner he drew in our class.  But as far as what they got on it doesn't matter to me if it's tights or not that is just simply how it is presented for the most part. I also feel super hero comics tend to be more visually appealing. I guess if space shows spent more time on planets rather than on ships i wouldn't get bored with seeing the same visual repetitively on panel.

----------


## chongjasmine

For me, I like superheroes because they are cool!

----------


## Mormel

Reminder that this is a thread that's basically resurrected from the dead... Xheight is quoting two posts that are respectively 1 and 3 years old, so don't hold your breath waiting for a quick reply  :Big Grin: 

I'm somewhat confused by the original post since superhero stories _are_ science fiction stories [last surviving alien baby lands on Earth; people gaining powers after being exposed to otherwise dangerous radiation, etc. etc.], and many of them delve into similar topics as the one the thread starter proposes as examples (alternate realities, genetically engineered humans).

----------


## Totoro Man

well, since the thread got necro'd...

it sounds ludicrous to write these words but... superheroes have an advantage over Star Trek in that they are more consistently written as a reflection of the present and real world.  that fact, all by itself, is going to help give superhero narratives much broader appeal than Star Trek.

Star Trek is always been planted firmly in a VERY idealized futuristic space fantasy scenario.  Star Trek is also even more blatantly utopian than many superhero stories.  somehow the Earth has gotten rid of money, racism, resource scarcity, and a whole host of other problems that appear to be impossible to eradicate.  

it is also interesting to point out that when people attempt to abandon certain aspects of that utopian future in a desperate bid to make the franchise relevant... the old-school fans hate it.

beyond a certain point, Star Trek becomes a sort of parallel superhero story for people who think they're too smart for spandex and capes.  the Starfleet officers just use technobabble and impossible "physics" to save the day instead of superpowers and magic.

I loved TOS and TNG when I was growing up.  but, I gave up on DS9 after about a half-dozen episodes.  Voyager lost me at three episodes.  after that, I just didn't care about Trek at all.  it had a sort of patronizing moralism that I would expect from direct-to-video Christian educational movies or safety protocol training videos.  it just stopped being fun.

----------


## slop101

Me, I mostly just like comic book _ART_, and my favorite artists (Jack Kirby, Alan Davis, George Perez, Barry Smith, etc, etc) all happen to draw superhero comics, mostly.

----------


## Xheight

> Your words also seem to be implying that we ought not read super-hero comics because the society sucks? Like I can actually change society and it is my moral obligation to stop pollution? That's one high horse. Humans are wired to play games. Stop judging us.
> 
> On a related note:
> 
> When supers try to solve fundamental problems on earth, time and time again they are depicted as overstepping their bounds (Squadron Supreme, Emperor Doom, Watchmen, The Authority, etc.).
> 
> You may have no problems with Superman destroying all nukes, overthrowing North Korea, or fixing carbon emissions- and in fact, the Golden Age Superman did declare war on crooked politicians, traffic, and gambling. But the sheer majority of writers and readers know that Superman would be anointing himself a god if he tried to stop China from overfishing. At best this stuff works with heroes like Animal Man or Aquaman.
> 
> Not sure why you never heard of climate change as a kid. Earth Day was celebrated at my school in the 1980s, and let's not forget Captain Planet in 1990.


It might not be golden age but certainly Silver Age Defenders introduced to us not just the Guardians of the Galaxy but Ozone depletion and radiation dangers.  So yes environment arrived as issue way back and fits with the sci-fi hazards of the genre.

----------


## Xheight

> Reminder that this is a thread that's basically resurrected from the dead... Xheight is quoting two posts that are respectively 1 and 3 years old, so don't hold your breath waiting for a quick reply 
> 
> I'm somewhat confused by the original post since superhero stories _are_ science fiction stories [last surviving alien baby lands on Earth; people gaining powers after being exposed to otherwise dangerous radiation, etc. etc.], and many of them delve into similar topics as the one the thread starter proposes as examples (alternate realities, genetically engineered humans).


I agree Superheroes form a sub-genre if one has to be so formal about it of Sci-fi however it has certain tropes that a lot of Science Fiction by passes like power and responsibility in favor of technologic influenced structural changes to society and alien realities.  As I note though there are other things beside literary genre elements that effect the popularity of sci-fi in comics that have to do with differences in the medium itself and how we experience them.    For me for example there is no substitute for the wow factor in movies that moving space ships provide.   On paper the fight for the Death Star or the battle with Khan in space does not translate the way that a fight between Spidey and the Green Goblin does.

----------


## Xheight

> well, since the thread got necro'd...
> 
> it sounds ludicrous to write these words but... superheroes have an advantage over Star Trek in that they are more consistently written as a reflection of the present and real world.  that fact, all by itself, is going to help give superhero narratives much broader appeal than Star Trek.
> 
> Star Trek is always been planted firmly in a VERY idealized futuristic space fantasy scenario.  Star Trek is also even more blatantly utopian than many superhero stories.  somehow the Earth has gotten rid of money, racism, resource scarcity, and a whole host of other problems that appear to be impossible to eradicate.  
> 
> it is also interesting to point out that when people attempt to abandon certain aspects of that utopian future in a desperate bid to make the franchise relevant... the old-school fans hate it.
> 
> beyond a certain point, Star Trek becomes a sort of parallel superhero story for people who think they're too smart for spandex and capes.  the Starfleet officers just use technobabble and impossible "physics" to save the day instead of superpowers and magic.
> ...


great points because I can relate to the failed critical stance that Science Fiction once held over pure idealism.  That so much of that idealism is linked to technology is very worrying despite current Trek trying so very hard to inject humanism and enlightenment into its stories it remains more about a kind of salvation rather than a look at the horror and inhumanity that humans encounter.

----------


## jonas43

Hello, I also read about superheroes because Star Treck is not my atmosphere at all I do not like these comics for me they are boring unfortunately I used to read and I did not like the will about superheroes they are much better than star treck but everyone prefers other comics I already read about superheroes I've tried others for almost 2 years, but these are the best

----------


## Citizen Kane

I think the answer is much more simple than people realize: super hero comic books are just generally more visually appealing to the eye. A proper Star Trek comic series simply couldn't contend with the visuals of say a Batman or Justice League issue. However, that's not to say a Star Trek series couldn't be visually appealing or good. There are lots of stunning comic series where the art was less than "flashy" that still were amazing reads. I think it all ultimately comes down to super hero books being one of the "fast foods" of visual styles.

----------


## Zelena

I read superheroes comics like I read non-superheroes comics… If the story is good, if the characters are sympathetic…

I started reading them when I was a child so I know some characters… But it’s true they have changed a lot.

----------


## albert

It's a fair question. Both are genre fiction, both have an action and adventure component, both have iconic heroes, both have a cast of supporting characters, etc. (Although I would argue that Trek is a bit more about the characters and less about the action/adventure.)

It's not because Star Trek doesn't have any good stories. It's just that most of the time when you go into your friendly neighborhood comic book store, you're going to find something with Spiderman or Batman on it. That's because those are among the most recognizable superheroes in the world. Even if you're not familiar with these characters, you probably know of them. You know they're heroes. You know they save people. You know they fight supervillains and aliens and mythological creatures on a regular basis.

----------


## Captain Britain of Earth 20

I think because there's not really enough Star Trek comic titles which is a shame because personally loved to read a *Section 31 or an Enterprise-B*  book or a Star Trek book which has them exploring their Multiverse which would be fascinating

----------

