Tiering Iron Man

WaPost derides Iron Man as a "second-tier" super hero. Jonathan Last tries to defend his first-tier status, but I think that's a mistake. The problem with the article is that it doesn't do due deference to the significance of the second tier. At the end of the day, the first tier of costumed crime fighters is limited to just three members -- Superman, Spiderman, and Batman -- truly ubiquitous figures who any American could recognize even if they don't know anything about them.

Iron Man belongs firmly to a second-tier of major comic book characters who'd be instantly familiar to anyone who was, at any time in his or (less likely) her life a reader of superhero books.

Where a lot of folks surprised about the success of the Iron Man film seem to me to have gone wrong is just in underestimating how big the audience for the second-tier is. But the reality is that while current-and-former comic book fans are a minority of Americans, it's a pretty big minority, and it doesn't really take that many people to make a hit movie. A third- or forth-rate hero like Elongated Man could never carry the day, but the second tier is fertile ground if you just manage to put a decent film together.

Comments

I will personally go see an Elongated Man movie as many times as it takes to make it a hit.

Posted by LittleMac | May 7, 2008 12:01 PM

Ralph Dibney 4eva! :D

Posted by Peter St. John | May 7, 2008 12:05 PM

I will personally go see an Elongated Man movie as many times as it takes to make it a hit.

Posted by LittleMac | May 7, 2008 12:07 PM

Wow, a double post separated by six minutes. Anywhere other than the Atlantic servers I think that would be a new record.

Posted by LittleMac | May 7, 2008 12:10 PM

the first tier of costumed crime fighters is limited to just three members -- Superman, Spiderman, and Batman

Nah, it's five. Those three and the Wonder Twins.

Posted by Al | May 7, 2008 12:10 PM

I'd say that the X-Men belong in the top tier, but granted that's only because of the movie franchise. This movie may well make Iron Man a top tier hero.

Posted by Philly | May 7, 2008 12:10 PM

Exactly right.

"X-Men" provided the proof that second-tier comic book characters could sell tickets at the box office.

Only quibble: lots of people will see a movie about characters that they haven't seen before, or are only vaguely aware are from another medium. I personally was surprised that my non-comic-reading friends thought X-Men was a pretty good movie, since I thought only comic geeks would be interested.

I don't think it's _only_ current-and-former comic book fans that make the audience for successful comic movies. Indeed, a fair definition for the top tier is comic book characters whose presence in other media drives sales of their comics, instead of the other way around. Why do we assume that all other characters are only going to attract audiences that are already "in the tank"? It shouldn't surprise us that there's a middle ground of characters (and movies) drawing audiences to the movie without _also_ convincing them to "buy the book".

Posted by Bob | May 7, 2008 12:13 PM

No, MY's right - walk up to the average person and ask them who Superman is, and he or she will know. He's a man who wears a red cape and blue tights, he's super strong, and he can fly. And he's got a secret identity as Clark Kent. Everyone knows that much. Not so with the X-Men; certainly not before the movies.

Posted by ajay | May 7, 2008 12:13 PM

Not only that, but the second tier may actually more opportunities cinematically and dramatically than the first tier. I've always looked on Iron Man as a cool-looking character -- maybe even the coolest -- but the stories never grabbed me. Tony Stark wasn't that compelling to me. I felt that way at ten, and at forty. When I heard that Jon Favreau and Robert Downey, Jr. were involved in the movie, it sounded like a pretty good fit to me. Here were a couple of guys who would take what was cool about Iron Man, and build on it. It sounds like they pulled it off.

That said, I'd still really like to see someone do Howard the Duck the right way. I know it'll never happen -- the movie totally killed the property. Steve Gerber's orginal stories were absurd and rather dark -- something the filmmakers seemed to completely miss - and it'd be nice to think that maybe someday, somehow, someone will do justice to that.

But I fear we're more likely to see Elongated Man, The Movie before that happens. Hell, there's a better chance of a big-budget Ambush Bug feature...

Posted by Roddy McCorley | May 7, 2008 12:16 PM

Are Superman, Batman and Spider Man first tier because of movies and television shows?

A good Captain America movie, or Hulk movie or even Green Lantern movie could push any of them to the first tier - if the movie is really popular - and the popularity of the movie does not need to draw entirely or mostly from the popularity of the character.

Luke Skywalker is a first tier comic book superhero who had no prior comic book experience.

Posted by Arnold Evans | May 7, 2008 12:16 PM

I would think the Hulk would rate as a first tier comic book character as far as name recognition goes. In the subset of people old enough to remember who Lynda Carter is, I'd add Wonder Woman to that list as well.

Posted by Mike T | May 7, 2008 12:16 PM

90% of the people seeing Ironman have never read an IM comic, and 99% of those people WILL never read an Ironman comic.

Favreau put together what looks like (still haven't seen it) a kick-ass movie. Ironman could be an original character all most people know.

oh, and any Elongated Man movie should star the guy who played Ed in that "Ed" nbc tv series as Ralph Dibny.

Posted by rob! | May 7, 2008 12:17 PM

Spiderman does not belong in the first tier. He's a dumb asshole, but even if he wasn't he simply isn't in the same realm as Batman and Superman. Just isn't.

Posted by bend | May 7, 2008 12:19 PM

Never a comic book fan, and certainly not an Iron Man fan (I'm Superman all the way!) but I completely enjoyed the movie which I believe to be a perfect summer movie.

Spiderman 2 is the best of the genre, but Iron Man is excellent and in the same category as the last Batman movie.

Posted by Don | May 7, 2008 12:19 PM

Not only that, but the second tier may actually more opportunities cinematically and dramatically than the first tier. I've always looked on Iron Man as a cool-looking character -- maybe even the coolest -- but the stories never grabbed me. Tony Stark wasn't that compelling to me. I felt that way at ten, and at forty. When I heard that Jon Favreau and Robert Downey, Jr. were involved in the movie, it sounded like a pretty good fit to me. Here were a couple of guys who would take what was cool about Iron Man, and build on it. It sounds like they pulled it off.

That said, I'd still really like to see someone do Howard the Duck the right way. I know it'll never happen -- the movie totally killed the property. Steve Gerber's orginal stories were absurd and rather dark -- something the filmmakers seemed to completely miss - and it'd be nice to think that maybe someday, somehow, someone will do justice to that.

But I fear we're more likely to see Elongated Man, The Movie before that happens. Hell, there's a better chance of a big-budget Ambush Bug feature...

Posted by Roddy McCorley | May 7, 2008 12:20 PM

To clarify, I meant that MY was "exactly right", although Philly's comment and my definition of "top tier" seem to be consonant, along with ajay's comment after.

Posted by Bob | May 7, 2008 12:22 PM

i'd add wonder woman. dc's big three are all well known by people who have never seen a comic book.

Posted by dj spellchecka | May 7, 2008 12:23 PM

I think part of the problem is that the visibility for the top tier is so high as compared to everything else, that you just can't compete.

The X-Men movie looked cool, and that got people in the door. But at this point, quite frankly, I think that even in the non-comic crowd, Marvel Studios at this point after Spider-Man has a lot of market credibility for making smart, fun popcorn movies.

Iron Man will only serve to reinforce this, IMO. The reality is that because of this, I strongly believe they'd even be able to sell 3rd tier character based movies just by marketing them as being in the "Marvel Universe".

And they probably will. Although the only question I have, is how the movie-going public will receive a Deadpool movie.

Posted by Karmakin | May 7, 2008 12:25 PM

I would argue that Spiderman was not a first-tier superhero until they started churning out Spiderman movies. And I'd argue further that the idea of first-tier and second-tier is fluid, based on the pop culture of the moment. Captain America, for example, was certainly a much more recognizable character in the '50s and '60s. The Hulk was more recognizable when he was a fixture on prime-time TV. Perhaps the success of the Iron Man movie will promote Iron Man to first-tier status, at least over the short-term future.

Posted by Fred App | May 7, 2008 12:25 PM

Iron Man is such a seoncd-tier superhero that I was surprised to learn that the comic book character hadn't been turned to steel in a great magnetic field--see the Black Sabbath lyrics:

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/black+sabbath/iron+man_20019426.html

As for an Elongated Man move, well, that strikes me as a bit of a stretch . . .

Forgive me, please.

Posted by rea | May 7, 2008 12:27 PM

I agree that Hulk would also be on the first tier. Maybe because of the television show but I doubt there are many people over the age of say 15 who are not familiar with the character. Sales wise, the Xmen and the Fantastic Four have always rivaled those other titles but I can certainly see that non-comic readers would not be as familiar with those characters. You are right Matt that its a very small club at the top.

Posted by brent | May 7, 2008 12:28 PM

"90% of the people seeing Ironman have never read an IM comic, and 99% of those people WILL never read an Ironman comic.

Favreau put together what looks like (still haven't seen it) a kick-ass movie. Ironman could be an original character all most people know."

Not quite. I think the shift from the newsstand to the Direct Market and the implosion of that Direct Market in the mid 90s has led folks to forget just how popular comics, especially super-hero comics, used to be. I believe Iron Man got his own title in the late 60s, after sharing a split book with another character (Dr. Strange?). That solo title consistenly sold 180,000+ copies a month through the 70s and 80s. Given the then traditional turnover in the comic audience, that's a hell of a lot of people.

You can't look at the fanboy niche comics of today and judge the appeal or popularity of a lot of characters. You've got to remember that for decades comic books were a fairly ubiquitous part of American childhood.

Mike

Posted by MBunge | May 7, 2008 12:33 PM

This is so nerdy but I would put Superman and Batman as numbers one and two. Then after some distance there is the hulk, wonderwoman, captain america and spiderman, then after some more distance green lantern, wolverine. Then the sort of catch all for iron man, the fantastic four, daredevil and the like.

Posted by Michael Foody | May 7, 2008 12:36 PM

I'd agree with dj spellchecka that Wonder Woman is first tier. Captain America may also be first tier as his death still makes the papers. That said, I think his overall cultural prominence is probably not as high as it used to be.

Posted by Greg Sanders | May 7, 2008 12:36 PM

Here's some first-tier for you: In an intellectual property case some years back, the issue arose whether Superman was an alien and whether the use of Superman on a magazine cover infringed on some alien-related publication. (Sounds like a stretch to me, Reed.) Michael Mukasey, then a district judge, took judicial notice* that Superman was an alien, from the planet Krypton.

* "Judicial notice" is a doctrine that allows a judge to take as proven a fact so obvious that evidence need not be presented.

Posted by CJColucci | May 7, 2008 12:37 PM

"As for an Elongated Man move, well, that strikes me as a bit of a stretch . . .

Forgive me, please."

You are not forgiven. Your children and your children's children shall forever carry the shame for your little "joke."

Posted by brent | May 7, 2008 12:39 PM

So what about Thor? to me he seems like a third-tier superhero (far less cache than Iron Man or the Fantastic 4), and yet Marvel Studios is planning to release a Thor movie in 2010.

Can a third-tier character carry a major movie release?

I'd love to see a blog post explaining the various tiers of comic book heroes and who's in them.

Posted by andrew | May 7, 2008 12:39 PM

MBunge:
Iron Man split the book with Captain America. Dr. Strange was the back of the book character with Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Not only am I a nerd, I'm an old nerd.

Posted by CJColucci | May 7, 2008 12:41 PM

Does this mean we'll see a Warmachine movie?

Posted by freddiemac | May 7, 2008 12:48 PM

Marvel Comics heroes are all 2nd tier. Superman and Batman are like Sherlock Holmes: they seem to have an existence outside the work they appear in.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | May 7, 2008 12:50 PM

I'm a couple years behind on all this stuff, but didn't Ralph Dibney die in 52? And even if he somehow came back, the dude was a huge bummer from his wife's death on - I can't imagine anyone would be looking to watch that.

Additionally, third-tier characters like Ghost Rider or Daredevil have had their shot, and the movies were total garbage. The good thing about Marvel having their own production set-up is that Thor and the Hulk and whoever else is coming down the pipe will get the same awesome treatment that Iron Man got.

Posted by dmgroves | May 7, 2008 12:51 PM

I'm a couple years behind on all this stuff, but didn't Ralph Dibney die in 52? And even if he somehow came back, the dude was a huge bummer from his wife's death on - I can't imagine anyone would be looking to watch that.

Additionally, third-tier characters like Ghost Rider or Daredevil have had their shot, and the movies were total garbage. The good thing about Marvel having their own production set-up is that Thor and the Hulk and whoever else is coming down the pipe will get the same awesome treatment that Iron Man got.

Posted by dmgroves | May 7, 2008 12:53 PM

This discussion is . . . something else.

Anyway, I agree with Mike T and others about the Hulk. Wonder Woman, I'm not so sure about. Her appeal is, um, kind of specific.

Posted by Trieu | May 7, 2008 12:59 PM

Do your readers a favor, Matt. Leave out the gender definitions -- (less likely ) her. Just say his or her.

Whether female fans of comic books (like myself) are lesser in numbers than our male counterparts or not, the disparity doesn't merit mention at all.

But I do agree with your general sentiment, so I suppose I will let it slide.

Posted by Choward | May 7, 2008 1:00 PM

Bring on the Wonder Twins!

Posted by m. ohollern | May 7, 2008 1:01 PM

Bring on the Wonder Twins!

Posted by m. ohollern | May 7, 2008 1:02 PM

I think the test of "tierness" is in how many of their supervillains you can name. In that regard, Batman and Spiderman even outdo Superman.

Posted by Njorl | May 7, 2008 1:03 PM

I may be somewhat lonely in this view, but I really didn't like the Iron Man movie, largely because a find Tony Stark to be a boring moral role model.

Clark Kent and Peter Parker have awesome powers but have made a decision not to profit off of them, and must constantly struggle with that decision. Bruce Wayne is even more compelling. He's rich as hell, but doesn't give a damn about it. He surrounds himself with opulence and beautiful women, but he doesn't enjoy it and does so only to provide a mask for his true identity as Batman. Bruce Wayne is a study in irony---he has everything a man could want, and views it as a chore.

Tony Stark, however, starts off as a billionaire celebrity with women throwing themselves at him; and he ends up as a billionaire celebrity with women throwing themselves at him AND superpowers. He's like the Hannah Montana of superheroes---never having to make a difficult decision between his masked identity and his unmasked self.

Posted by Ian | May 7, 2008 1:06 PM

It seems to me that Daredevil should have been a first tier. After all, almost every time Spiderman and Daredevil meet they end up fighting, and almost every time they fight, Daredevil cleans Spidey's clock. And lets remember Spiderman has the strength of 10, can throw webs and cling to surfaces, whereas Daredevils only advantage is that he is blind. :-)

Posted by Stephen | May 7, 2008 1:11 PM

So, kids argue about whether Spiderman could beat Superman in a fair fight, while adults argue about whether they're first tier or second tier. . . .but when I became a man, I put away childish things. :-)

Posted by RSA | May 7, 2008 1:14 PM

I would also add that Marvel superheroes are pretty lame. First tier, second tier. Just not that into them.

Posted by Choward | May 7, 2008 1:14 PM

What the hell is wrong with you people!?!?!?

Some people have argued that Spider Man wasn't first tier until the movies (Bend, Fred App, Jeffrey Davis). Are you people insane? Do you live on some sort of Bizzaro world? Spider Man is, and has always been, one of the top tier super heroes. Easily on par with Superman and Batman (yeah, I prefer Marvel comics, so what!).

Anyway, here are some more arguements:

1. DC top tier: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and...Aquaman! Yes, Aquaman! He can talk to fish.

2. Marvel top tier: Spiderman, Captain America, the Incredible Hulk, and Wolverine. You know, the X-men were one of the most popular comic books from the 1970's to the 1990's (especially during the Jim Lee years). Most people might not be able to name most of the X-men, but they definately knew who Wolverine was (the guy with the claws).

Posted by Fighting Words | May 7, 2008 1:20 PM

What the hell is wrong with you people!?!?!?

Some people have argued that Spider Man wasn't first tier until the movies (Bend, Fred App, Jeffrey Davis). Are you people insane? Do you live on some sort of Bizzaro world? Spider Man is, and has always been, one of the top tier super heroes. Easily on par with Superman and Batman (yeah, I prefer Marvel comics, so what!).

Anyway, here are some more arguements:

1. DC top tier: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and...Aquaman! Yes, Aquaman! He can talk to fish.

2. Marvel top tier: Spiderman, Captain America, the Incredible Hulk, and Wolverine. You know, the X-men were one of the most popular comic books from the 1970's to the 1990's (especially during the Jim Lee years). Most people might not be able to name most of the X-men, but they definately knew who Wolverine was (the guy with the claws).

Posted by Fighting Words | May 7, 2008 1:22 PM

So what about Thor? to me he seems like a third-tier superhero (far less cache than Iron Man or the Fantastic 4), and yet Marvel Studios is planning to release a Thor movie in 2010.

If first-tier is a superhero that someone even if they've never touched a comic book (such as Superman, Batman, the Hulk and probably a few others), and a second-tier character is one that anyone who has semi-regularly or regularly read comics would know about (FF, X-Men, Iron Man, Green Lantern, lots more), then I think a third-tier comic book character would be one that a comic book reader might see in a movie or another medium and not be aware they're from a comic book. Howard the Duck or the Men in Black, maybe.

Posted by Cyrus | May 7, 2008 1:26 PM

Aquaman is most definitely not first tier. Just a few weeks ago I was talking to a friend and mentioned Aquaman and much to my surprise he asked me "Who's Aquaman?" After describing him -- you know, orange costume, talks to fish, extremely lame -- my friend was even more baffled as to who this mysterious character was.

Posted by Mike T | May 7, 2008 1:30 PM

Limiting your concept of "Top-Tier" superheroes to just three - Superman, Batman, Spider-Man - overlooks the fact there are dozens of identifiable superheroes that the public as a whole can quickly and openly support.

Instead of three, think ten (nice, round number 10 that all lists use):
1) Superman - the first, the one and only.
2) Batman - the gritty human alternative to the uberman concept of the Superman
3) Spider-Man - the first flawed hero that wasn't a dark anti-hero, and a more identifiable geek character in Peter Parker than Clark Kent ever was
4) Wonder Woman - the first major female superhero, and the first major sex fantasy to boot
5) Hulk - does he represent the Id or the Superego? Possibly the first superhero used in psych 101 college courses
6) Captain America - WWII Icon converted into post-Vietnam nostalgia for pure heroes
7) Wolverine - first anti-hero fighter to become a popular figure, and a major draw for the X-Men movies
8) Flash - the ultimate speedster figure, playing off the fantasy of how fast kids think they can run
9) Iron Man - like Batman (rich industrialist) with all the wonderful toys, but with more snark and better weapons
10) Captain Marvel/Shazam - let's admit he's a ripoff of the Superman idea, but still he's a recognizable figure

Posted by PaulW | May 7, 2008 1:30 PM

Limiting your concept of "Top-Tier" superheroes to just three - Superman, Batman, Spider-Man - overlooks the fact there are dozens of identifiable superheroes that the public as a whole can quickly and openly support.

Instead of three, think ten (nice, round number 10 that all lists use):
1) Superman - the first, the one and only.
2) Batman - the gritty human alternative to the uberman concept of the Superman
3) Spider-Man - the first flawed hero that wasn't a dark anti-hero, and a more identifiable geek character in Peter Parker than Clark Kent ever was
4) Wonder Woman - the first major female superhero, and the first major sex fantasy to boot
5) Hulk - does he represent the Id or the Superego? Possibly the first superhero used in psych 101 college courses
6) Captain America - WWII Icon converted into post-Vietnam nostalgia for pure heroes
7) Wolverine - first anti-hero fighter to become a popular figure, and a major draw for the X-Men movies
8) Flash - the ultimate speedster figure, playing off the fantasy of how fast kids think they can run
9) Iron Man - like Batman (rich industrialist) with all the wonderful toys, but with more snark and better weapons
10) Captain Marvel/Shazam - let's admit he's a ripoff of the Superman idea, but still he's a recognizable figure

Posted by PaulW | May 7, 2008 1:33 PM

Good point about how minor fans can still add up to huge numbers. Industry lore has it that right after winning a national karate championship Chuck Norris made his first movie pitch by saying "you've never heard of me but if you put me in a movie all five million karate association members will buy a ticket." Which, in fact, they did.

It doesn't explain why anyone bought a ticket for his *next* movie but that's not the point.

figleaf

Posted by figleaf | May 7, 2008 1:34 PM

I think the test of "tierness" is in how many of their supervillains you can name. In that regard, Batman and Spiderman even outdo Superman.

That's a pretty interesting test. I think the average person on the street could name somewhere between 2-5 spiderman or batman villains. I think 95% of the population could name exactly one superman supervillain and no more than one. I bet even a lot of comic book fans would have to think about it for a few seconds to name anyone other than the one we all know.

Posted by brent | May 7, 2008 1:36 PM

after winning a national karate championship Chuck Norris made his first movie pitch by saying "you've never heard of me but if you put me in a movie all five million karate association members will buy a ticket."

All very well, except that Chuck Norris' first movie role was the bad guy in a Bruce Lee movie, Return of the Dragon, a/k/a Way of the Dragon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbIwQMBeC2c

Posted by rea | May 7, 2008 1:44 PM

The next few movies Marvel is planning (after Iron Man 2) are Thor, Captain America, and Ant-Man, all of whom add up (with Iron Man and the Hulk) to the Avengers (coming in 2011).

I think this is a brilliant move on Marvel's part... Even though you could argue that Thor is third tier and Ant-Man is tenth tier, their concern is a cohesive narrative. These movies will not be one-offs, but add up to a Marvel Movie Universe, as the comics did.

Bonus news: Apparently Edgar Wright is going to write and direct Ant-Man, so it will have an appropriate level of absurdity.

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20197922,00.html

Posted by Eric | May 7, 2008 1:54 PM

So, who'd play Hal Jordan in a movie? Josh Hartnett?

Better yet, who'd play Guy Gardener? You gotta get that one right.

Tim Roth could play Sinestro.

Posted by Shawn | May 7, 2008 1:54 PM

Lower-tier characters are, of course, fertile ground for comic book movies. Blade should be proof of that.

Posted by Anthony | May 7, 2008 1:56 PM

Some people have argued that Spider Man wasn't first tier until the movies (Bend, Fred App, Jeffrey Davis). Are you people insane? Do you live on some sort of Bizzaro world?

Thanks for so elegantly proving my point.

[my emphasis in the above]

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | May 7, 2008 1:59 PM

I was a voracious reader of DC comics from around 1960 (age 7) and Marvel from around '64, drifting off around the end of the decade when in high school. My knowledge of comic books after 1970 is fragmentary, but I knew the '60s well. FWIW, each company had a clear "first tier" of two characters back then: Superman and Batman for DC and the Fantastic Four (OK, four charactes) and Spider-man for Marvel. Superman was clearly tops, featured (in one form or another) in at least a half dozen titles in that era (Superman, Action Comics, Superboy/Legion of Superheroes, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, and World's Finest, which at that time featured a Superman-Batman teamup in each issue). Batman was featured in Batman, Detective Comics, and the aforementioned World's Finest. Both were prominently featured in JLA. In 1961, the Fantastic Four was the inital creation of what would become the Marvel pantheon (though it would ultimately include some characters such as Captain America and the Sub-mariner, created in the '40s by Marvel's corporate ancestor). FF was clearly Marvel's flagship title through the '60s, gaining the cover billing, with typical Stan Lee tongue-in-cheek bravado, of "The World's Greatest Comic Magaazine" with issue #4. Spider-man came along in 1962 and clearly became Marvel's premier character after the FF. Iron Man was probably second tier at best; he did not have his own book until late in the '60s (he shared one, primarily with Captain America). His status was probably behind Daredevil and X-Men, roughly equal with Thor, and ahead of Ant-Man/Giant-Man and Dr. Strange. BTW, I was able to check that FF issue reference on my DVD of all Fantastic Four issues from 1961 to the early 2000s; I have similar collections for Spider-Man, Avengers, X-Men, and Captain America (and similar ones exist for Iron Man and the Hulk). These reproduce scanned versions of the original comics (including original ads, letters pages, Stan Lee's Soapbox, etc.) in .pdf form. They look great and on a 20 inch WS monitor are almost exactly the size of the comic book. At about $40 they'd be cheap at twice the price (to paraphrase Alfred E. Newman). Unfortunately, I believe that Marvel declined to renew the rights to the company that produced these, so no new sets will be fortcoming (I was hoping for Daredevil and Thor).

Posted by Marlowe | May 7, 2008 2:00 PM

Also, just becuase a character is in a comic that doesn't sell all that well (i.e. most comics these days), that doesn't mean that they aren't well-known. More widely cosnumed media such as cartoons, television shows, videos games, and even action figures (don't call 'em dolls!) regularly feature comic characters, thus broadening their appeal beyond the fanboy niche. If a character or characters do well enough in on or more of these mediums it can often be enough to catapault them into the movies.

That, or a fanboy like Guiermo del Torro takes a shine to you (hi, Hellboy!).

Posted by Shawn | May 7, 2008 2:14 PM

"His status was probably behind Daredevil and X-Men, roughly equal with Thor"

Iron Man may have started out in a split book but he clearly ranked above Daredevil and X-Men, two books that brought up the rear of Marvel sales until the late 70s/early 80s.

Mike

Posted by MBunge | May 7, 2008 2:17 PM

I'd add Wonder Woman and Flash to the first tier. Maybe Hulk and Cap too, but Marvel kind of lags behind DC in popular recognition.

Posted by Alejandro | May 7, 2008 2:19 PM

I think the lack of built in audience knowledge actually can lead to better movies based on lower tier heros.

You have to actually dveelop the characters and back story and so on, with the well known heros the audience brings all that to the theater so lazy writers/directors can churn out formulastic crap pretty easily. When someone takes the time to really develop the movies (the first Superman, Tim Burton Batmans, the new Christian Bale versions or Spiderman 1 & 2) you can get something very good, but if they go through the motions (the Clooney and Kilmer Batmans, all the other supermans) you get junk. But since the characters are so well known you get a moderate hit anyway. With a lower tier hero you need a decent movie (X-Men for example) to get a blockbuster, the crap movies quickly die, ala Daredevil. I think Fantastic Four is the exception that porves the rule, mostly because their are plenty of geeks who will pay to see anything with Jessica Alba in it.

Posted by Eric k | May 7, 2008 2:19 PM

Iron Man and Daredevil were my favorite comic books. I'm happy to see a good Iron Man movie because Daredevil may be the worst comic book movie of all time. Now that they've gotten the technology down for Iron Man, I'd love to see an Avengers movie. They were my favorite superhero group. I never cared for the X-Men comic books although the X-Men movies are superb. I love everyone, even the flawed number three.

Posted by Keith Hood | May 7, 2008 2:20 PM

People knew about Spider-Man because of the cartoons. Remember when Timbaland released that song that played off the "Friendly neighborhood Spider-Man" theme? That song became a minor hit, in part people recognized it. That makes Spider-Man first tier. Wonder Woman is the most famous female super hero and gets mentioned in such middlebrow stuff as Sex and the City, so she's in also. The last goes for Wolverine and the Hulk. Most people had some idea who Wolverine was before the movie and if you said "Hulk smash" or "you wouldn't like me when I'm anry" to people, they would know what you were talking about even if they thought you were being a dork.

The Fantastic Four would be first tier if 1) the cartoon didn't suck and involve replacing the Human Torch with that dumb robot and 2) if the movies weren't so horribly bad.

Captain America is hard to place as first or second. The movie from the early 1990's was beyond bad, but that was due to being underfunded and messing with the mythology a lot (like making the Red Skull Italian for no reason). The costume looked cheap as hell.

It's kind of funny how the first comic book movie in the past ten years that did well was Blade, yet because it wasn't marketed as a comic book movie, no one remembers it as one.

Posted by Reality Man | May 7, 2008 2:24 PM

Bring on the Wonder Twins!

Now that's what I'm talking about.

First tier, BTW, is for characters everyone's mom (who doesn't go to summer popcorn movies) will know about. Mom has never heard of Wolverine, I mean, come on. Maybe Wonder Woman. Maybe.

Posted by Al | May 7, 2008 2:25 PM

I was never a big comic book reader and I must confess I hadn't heard of Iron Man, the Fantastic Four, Silver Surfer, Dare Devil, Ghost Rider etc. until their movies started being made.

Everyone though knows Superman, Batman, Spiderman, Captain America, Wonder Woman, and Hulk. I think that's the top-tier right there. And people have probably heard of The Flash...even if there not exactly sure what he looks like or what he does (runs fast I guess?).

X-Men is a special case because I did watch the cartoon on Saturday mornings as a kid, but before the movies, I'm not sure how many people heard of them.

Oh yeah, is Aquaman a real comic book character or just a plot device for Entourage? Thought I heard an Aquaman movie was being made....

Posted by Joe | May 7, 2008 2:28 PM

I'd add Wonder Woman and Hulk to the first tier too.

Reality Man, no one remembers The Crow as comic-based either.

Posted by Persia | May 7, 2008 2:31 PM

The Hulk and Wolverine defintely are 1st tier.

Spiderman is definitely in the top three. For christ's sake, when I was a kid I had everything Spiderman, and my little brother had everything Hulk.

And X-Men, Spidey, Batman and Daredevil were huge in the 80s when I was reading.

Shellhead was definitely second tier (although the movie will make him a star - it was awesome).

Posted by Gary | May 7, 2008 2:34 PM

I think the test of "tierness" is in how many of their supervillains you can name. In that regard, Batman and Spiderman even outdo Superman.

I don't know, I think there's just a separate tier for villains. I think I can name more Batman villains simply because there are more good Batman villains than there are good Superman villains. Also, I'm not sure there's as great a need for a wide variety of good Superman villains. Superman and Lex Luthor are perfectly paired: the super-strong alien hero vs. the super-smart human villain. On the other hand, the premise of Batman is that Gotham is always in danger of being swamped by rampant criminality, and that premise demands a variety of formidable villains.

Also, I may just be revealing my own ignorance, but are there that many widely-recognized Spider-Man villains? I remember the ones from the movies, but I don't think any of them resonate the way the Joker or Lex Luthor do. Does Spider-Man have a genuine nemesis the way Superman and Batman do?

I may be somewhat lonely in this view, but I really didn't like the Iron Man movie, largely because a find Tony Stark to be a boring moral role model....

Tony Stark, however, starts off as a billionaire celebrity with women throwing themselves at him; and he ends up as a billionaire celebrity with women throwing themselves at him AND superpowers. He's like the Hannah Montana of superheroes---never having to make a difficult decision between his masked identity and his unmasked self.

That's actually one of the things I liked about the Iron Man movie. He fills a niche that superheroes like Batman, Superman and Spider-Man don't. Unlike Superman he's a human being with recognizably human motivations and appetites (he likes sex and money), and unlike Batman and Spider-Man he's not weighed down by insecurity, neurosis, etc. I think there's room in the pantheon for a guy who enjoys his life and has fun being a superhero.

Posted by JB | May 7, 2008 2:39 PM

Oh yeah, is Aquaman a real comic book character or just a plot device for Entourage? Thought I heard an Aquaman movie was being made....

There was a pilot for an Aquaman television show made. It was pretty awful and obviously never got picked up. Aquaman absolutely has to be one of the lamest superheros ever.

Posted by brent | May 7, 2008 2:40 PM

Your tiers are all wrong. It's not about who's popular, it's about who could kick who's ass. Clearly Superman is on top of that list (modulo some kryptonite silliness). Beyond that it's more murky. Thor, Spiderman, Hulk, Cap'n America and Wonder Woman would be among those in the top sub-Superman tier. At the bottom are the guys in fancy suits...Iron Man clearly kicks Batman's ass in that tier.

Posted by me2i81 | May 7, 2008 2:43 PM

Fantastic Four is the exception that porves the rule, mostly because their are plenty of geeks who will pay to see anything with Jessica Alba in it.

"Porves?" Shouldn't that be spelled "pervs?" Brilliant construction, in my estimation.

Posted by James Gary | May 7, 2008 2:49 PM

"So what about Thor? to me he seems like a third-tier superhero ..."

He's the only one with a day of the week named for him.

Posted by Njorl | May 7, 2008 2:50 PM

It's either seven or right: Superman, Batman, Robin, Wonder Woman, Spider-Man, Captain American, the Hulk, and possibly Wolverine thanks to the movies and the cartoons. Note that with the exception of Captain America (I think) these are all significant other-media properties.

Posted by Aaron S. Veenstra | May 7, 2008 2:52 PM

To all you Aquaman haters, Aquaman was one of the original members of the Justice League of America. He was also one of the orginal Superfriends! Everyone knows Aquaman - he was the guy that Superman always had to rescue. ;op

Not a lot of love for the more ethnically diverse comic book heroes of the late 1960's-70's. My personal favorite was Samurai (so he was never actually in a comic book, he was on Challenge of the Super Friends).

Kaze no Yo ni Hayaku!!!

Posted by Fighting Words | May 7, 2008 2:55 PM

I'm kind of surprised so many people don't regard "X-Men" as first tier. The individual characters? Yeah. But as a title? It's certainly as well known as the other three.

I might argue about Wonder Woman too. But while I'd bet everyone knows who she is, I'd also bet no one knows a damn thing about her (like her origin story or villains).

Posted by Eric | May 7, 2008 2:59 PM

Im not sure if Spidey was really 1st tier before his movies came out.Also Wolverine by now is pretty well known to people under say 35

Posted by Eric | May 7, 2008 2:59 PM

"Iron Man may have started out in a split book but he clearly ranked above Daredevil and X-Men, two books that brought up the rear of Marvel sales until the late 70s/early 80s."

Well, I was trying to remember my 40-year old perceptions, which were were ignorant of sales figures and no doubt affected by personal biases. I particularly liked Daredevil, who I saw as a blind version of Batman, my favorite Marvel character as a kid (yeah, Captain America is probably a closer analog). As I hazily recall, my Marvel favorites were Spider-man, FF, the Avengers, Daredevil, and Thor (on the DC side, Batman, Superman, JLA, Flash, and Green Lantern), though I bought just about all the Marvel titles in the mid-60's (including Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos, but not Milly the Model). They were all released on the same day of the month and I generall picked them out of the seller's delivery before he could get them on the rack. I guess I'm turning into a grumpy old man, but I think it's sad to be Matt and not have grown up in a world when every corner in Brooklyn had a candy store with racks of comic books enticing the eye. I still remember waiting for weeks for the release of JLA #5 (I think), When Gravity Went Wild. I got it at a candy store near the school at lunch and was surreptitiously reading it in my third grade class (which makes it '61-62) when the teacher confiscated it until the following Monday, That was a loooong weekend.

Posted by Marlowe | May 7, 2008 3:00 PM

What's with all the confusion on Aquaman? Is he still around today? And does anyone still remember Aqualad? (Much of my comic knowledge ends by 1970.) I always liked Aquaman. If you want to "tier" '60s DC characters (and this is from a '60s perception, not as they may have subsequently evolved), Batman and Superman are first tier, Flash and Green Lantern are second tier, and Aquaman was near the top of a host of third tier characters (Green Arrow, J'onn J'onzz, Hawkman, the Atom). Fourth tier would be owned by the Elongated Man. I'm not sure where to put Wonder Woman. I never liked that character particularly (so I'm biased, I guess) but she was clearly not as iconic in the '60s and she would become with the '70s TV show. I would probably put her at the bottom of the second tier or at the top of the third.

Posted by Marlowe | May 7, 2008 3:26 PM

"Your tiers are all wrong. It's not about who's popular, it's about who could kick who's ass. Clearly Superman is on top of that list (modulo some kryptonite silliness)..."

There's the rub. Batman is going to be prepared. It is dramatically impossible for Superman to beat Batman because that isn't interesting.

In a similar vane, Spidey would beat Batman - by getting his ass kicked. The naive but supernaturally powered Spiderman would take a pounding as Batman used one sneaky trick after another, but Spiderman's persistant optimism would make Batman ashamed of his cynicism. He would stalk off untouched to rethink the cause of their quarrel, leaving a broken but victorious Spiderman.

Superman, of course, would have no such trouble with Spiderman. Superman knows he's always in the right. No silly mutant is going to guilt him into anything.

Posted by Njorl | May 7, 2008 3:28 PM

First tier? Who cares? Let's talk The Zero-tier comic hero:

There can be only one

I'll let out a little secret now that it can be told: he's President Bush in real life.

Posted by David W. | May 7, 2008 3:50 PM

So, who'd play Hal Jordan in a movie? Josh Hartnett?

Bob Kane said that when he drew Hal Jordan, he had Paul Newman in mind. Newman's much too old for the part now, of course. Maybe he could play Alan Scott.

Posted by CJColucci | May 7, 2008 4:00 PM

So, who'd play Hal Jordan in a movie? Josh Hartnett?

Gil Kane said that when he drew Hal Jordan, he had Paul Newman in mind. Newman's much too old for the part now, of course. Maybe he could play Alan Scott.

Posted by CJColucci | May 7, 2008 4:03 PM

oh course, we all know that batman would beat superman in a fight. even superman hopes that's true.

in the meantime, here's the first five pages of final crisis:

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20198161,00.html

Posted by dj spellchecka | May 7, 2008 4:10 PM

Shouldn't international recognition also be a factor? I live in Norway, and when I read comic books in the 80s and early nineties the most popular/well known heroes in Norway were:
Tier 1) The Phantom. (Yes, The Phantom).
The biggest selling title by a mile.
Tier 2) Superman, Batman and Spiderman. Each had a monthly magazine that sold ok. Batman became popular in the mid-60s (after the tv-series?), and stopped selling in the late 80s. Superman lasted a bit longer, until the early 90s. Spiderman lasted from the late 70s to the early 90s. They then started showing up again in the late 90s, probably due to increased interest from the movies.
Tier 3) The Hulk, Daredevil, Fantastic Four and X-Men had titles that lasted for a few years.

Aquaman, The Flash, Thor, Captain America and Iron Man showed up occationally in albums and in supporting roles, but they were (and are) generally unknown.

The superhero movies have never really taken off in Norway. They open quite well, but generally fade after a few weeks. This is mainly because the titles have little recognition, and maybe because we find them quite silly. I read spiderman as a teen, but I found all the movies to be quite bad. The same applies to the first four Batman movies, even though I have a soft spot for Returns. For me the most interesting movies has been The Hulk and Batman Begins, which felt like movies an adult could actually kind of defend.

Posted by kirenaj | May 7, 2008 4:11 PM

There are certain errors here.

Superman and Batman certainly preceded most other superheroes known today.

But Captain American came out in the 1940's and 1950's before being revised in "The Avengers" in the 1960's. So his longevity is pretty clearly established.

I'd say MBunge has it correct. Depending on your age (and Matt's just four years out of college, so what the fuck does he know?), other Marvel and DC characters may well be "first tier".

I think we can distinguish between "iconic" characters which would be Superman and batman, and "first tier" characters which would include Wonder Woman, Captain America, and some others - probably the Hulk and the X-Men. Most of the individual X-men weren't that well known, but I think Wolverine was HUGE in the '70's - it was his title and the Punisher who made Batman into "The Dark Knight" to compete with the "crazy superhero" subgenre that Marvel started.

Marlowe's right, too. I started buying comics when they were TEN CENTS - just before they went to TWELVE CENTS. Today's situation just isn't the same. It started going downhill when the companies started doing stupid stuff like putting out comics with "variant covers" and other stupid marketing tricks to boost sales - including stunts like "the death of Superman". I think it had a lot to do with that billionaire bozo who married Ellen Barkin owning one of the companies at the time.

I don't like all this "ret-con", "reboot" crap, either. These characters have forty year histories of character development. Coming along and just shit canning all that is just stupid. Change isn't bad, but random change for the sake of change is.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 7, 2008 4:12 PM

BTW, for those who haven't seen "Iron Man", definitely go see it.

The acting is top notch, the writing is brilliant, the comedy is brilliant, the plot is reasonably plausible, and the special effects are awesome.

I rank this one as one of the top ten best superhero movies of all time - close to being par with "X-Men 2", the first Superman, and the first Batman.

And both Gwyneth Paltrow and Leslie Bibb are hot.

Special acting note for Jeff Bridges, who is perfect - even if I didn't immediately recognize him with the bald head.

Also special acting note for the robot who keeps covering Tony Stark with foam. Matt is now paranoid about his apartment sprinkler system.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 7, 2008 4:20 PM

BTW, I'd REALLY like to see a supervillain get his own movie, just like they get their own comics.

"Doom 2099" would be an awesome movie if it followed the main theme of the book. Of course, they'd have to do a lot of initial explaining as to whom Doom is for non-comic book readers, but the rest of it would resonate with today's world even though set in the future. The anti-corporatism, the anti-militarism, it would rock.

Thanos would be another iconic character. That one would be harder as Thanos would be even more unknown to the audience. Still, if it was marketed as a movie for comic fans AND as a sci-fi movie in general, it could work. The whole "Samaritan" story line could be made to work with sufficient explanation of Galactus and maybe working in Warlock.

The DC equivalent of Thanos, Darkseid, could also be done the same way, particularly since the whole notion of "New Gods" could be sold without reference to the rest of the DC universe.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 7, 2008 4:27 PM

Being on the Electric Company makes Spiderman a first-tier hero.

Posted by dob | May 7, 2008 5:10 PM

I guess it depends on how you analyze this issue. Clearly, many commenters don't read comic books, so they judge the tier status by how well-known characters are to non-fans.

I think it makes more sense to judge them within the comic book universe. On that basis, characters ought to be judged on three criteria:

* Longevity
* Level of power
* Iconic status

Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, & Captain America all go back to WWII and earlier. They're all powerful beings. They have a very iconic status.

The Flash and Green Lantern probably are also near them, but at slightly lower level, since they've waxed and waned in popularity.

Since most of the Marvel characters (with the exception of Cap and Sub-Mariner) date from the Sixties, they lag a little, but Spider-Man, Daredevil, Fantastic Four, Hulk have all been around for a while and have appeared in enough best-selling books to qualify. Wolverine is a relative newcomer, but he quickly became popular.

In contrast, Will Eisner's The Spirit has been around for 68 years and is finally getting his own movie, but is more of a cult figure.

Posted by The Pop View | May 7, 2008 5:47 PM

Considering that I have still have a couple thousand comics in the basement, annoying my wife, I should have some credibility. And most of those are from the 70s, my 60s books lost or destroyed over the years. But sales of comic books now, and even in the 60s or 70s can't compare to the 40s, when I believe Superman was selling in the millions.

Iron Man is definitely second or possibly third tier. It sounds like they made a good movie out of it, but I don't see how they can make a decent Thor, not if they use the original story which was really lame.

There's a cool story about Hugh Jackman arriving in the US when they were going to make the first X-Man movie. The customs guy asked why he was entering the US and Jackman said I'm an actor and I'm going to be in a movie. The customs guy asked what movie and Jackman says, I'm playing Wolverine in an X-Man movie. The guy just goes nuts, Wolverine is my favorite character and you're going to play him! He couldn't get over it.

Posted by SteveH | May 7, 2008 5:47 PM

BTW, if you want to read a contemporary version of The Avengers that's tailor-made for the movies, get Mark Millar's first two volumes of The Ultimates.

Posted by The Pop View | May 7, 2008 5:52 PM

The test ought to be, if you do not read comics do you know who the guy is? Only about 7 super heroes pass this test: Superman, Batman, Spiderman, The Hulk, The Flash, Captain America, Wonder Woman.

At one time (in the 40's, 50's and 60's Captain Marvel might have passed this test. Green Lantern, Aquaman and Wolverine are very close.

The Fantastic Four make it but people do not know their names. If you say the stretchy guy, the rock guy, the invisible girl and the human torch they are first tier. If you say Reed Richards forget it.

The test for a movie is, if you knew nothing about this character would you love this movie? Iron Man, Batman Begins, Xman 1 & 2, and Spiderman 1 & 2 pass that test, as does the First Superman with Christopher Reeve, and the first two Blade pictures as well as Hellboy.

Fantastic Four 1 & 2 don't make that grade, neither does Daredevil.

And then there is Ang Lee's "Hulk" which was the "puny banner" of superhero films.

Posted by jjv | May 7, 2008 5:57 PM

If you want to determine tiers, and not just among comic geeks:

The DC Trinity of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman. The first two have always been popular and while the latter has waxed and waned, she is still the definitive female superhero, so much so that when she was depowered in the comics in the 1970s to ordinary human levels, feminist icons such as Gloria Steinem were complaining about it. About the only thing she hasn't had is a good movie, and hopefully that's coming.

On the Marvel side: Spider-Man, Captain America and the Hulk. Captain America might be on the iffy side, but show a non-comic geek his picture and you'd have a good chance of getting the name.

Everyone else, including Wolverine, is below that. Sure he's incredibly popular to people who like comics, but that popularity causes people to overestimate how much he's known outside of the fanbase and it doesn't come close to the others.

Posted by Keith | May 7, 2008 6:12 PM

Well, here's hoping that "The Dark Knight" measures up as a top 10 superhero movie. I can't wait, myself!

Posted by Shawn | May 7, 2008 6:58 PM

Judge Dredd is, and will always be, top tier in Brit-Cit. No amount of being ignored by Americans or traduced by Stallone can change that.

Also, where's the tier-two love for Swampy? Not a superhero in the strict sense, no. But a more than minor icon, no?

Posted by Oliver | May 7, 2008 7:40 PM

Judge Dredd is, and will always be, top tier in Brit-Cit. No amount of being ignored by Americans or traduced by Stallone can change that.

Also, where's the tier-two love for Swampy? Not a superhero in the strict sense, no. But a more than minor icon, no?

Posted by Oliver | May 7, 2008 7:43 PM

Not a comics fan, but if we’re talking lower-tier let’s hear it for the Legion of Substitute Heroes, filled with rejects from the Legion proper. Bottom of the heap both in name-recognition and awsomeness of powers. From Wikipedia: Antenna Lad! Has the power to tune into any broadcast from any era! But mostly at random! Infectious Lass! Spontaneously generates infectious diseases! (That’s generally considered a bug, not a feature, but anyway...) Porcupine Pete! Has quills he can shoot from his body! Although generally not very accurately!

I would definitely pay to see a movie about these guys.

Posted by Amit | May 7, 2008 9:02 PM

"Also, where's the tier-two love for Swampy? Not a superhero in the strict sense, no. But a more than minor icon, no?"

While Alan Moore's run on Swamp Thing was seminal, the real "horror hero" that we love the best is the Sandman. And his sister Death - the ultimate fanboy crush.

Posted by Shawn | May 7, 2008 11:07 PM

I can't BELIEVE I missed this conversation. (Disclaimer: I'm a huge comics nerd.)

I'm a Marvel fan myself, but it's easy to see why Superman and Batman are the two most recognizable comic book characters. The two are opposites, and reflect off each other so well. The righteous morality of Superman vs the grim realism of Batman, Superman's willingness to help anyone vs Batman's more personal vendettas... even a comparison of how they receive their powers (Superman's was 'given', Batman doesn't even have 'powers' and all his ability was learned.)

The closest psychological study that Marvel has in the mainstream is the Incredible Hulk, as mentioned above. Thanos is also quite an interesting figure, but he's third or maybe fourth tier.

Posted by LnGrrrR | May 8, 2008 1:32 AM

Also, Pop View, I have been clamoring for an Ultimates movie for the past two or three years. I keep hoping.

Posted by LnGrrrR | May 8, 2008 1:34 AM

Is no one going to bring up Ninja Turtles?
Where do they fit in? Maybe not first tier but I'd say they are more well known than Iron Man (tho this movie may change that). And in the early 90's the Turtles were probably more well knwon than Spider Man (thanks to the movies).

Posted by Andrew Zammit | May 8, 2008 2:32 AM

Amit: I think after the poor performances of Mystery Men and The Specials, no one is champing at the bit to do another group-of-loser-heroes movie...

Posted by eric | May 8, 2008 3:47 AM

...And if they were, Great Lakes Avengers would be the way to go.

Posted by eric | May 8, 2008 3:51 AM

The Inferior Five!

Posted by CJColucci | May 8, 2008 10:51 AM

Is no one going to bring up Ninja Turtles?
Where do they fit in?

In the 80s, their comic was top tier among the indies. They predate the rise of Dark Horse Comics. For a long time, issue #1 of TMNT was the most sought after (and expensive) comic released in the 80s.

Can you name another comic character from the 80s that is (1) more famous than the turtles and (2) not DC or Marvel?

Posted by Walker | May 8, 2008 12:23 PM

Just promise me that when they make the Thor movie, Arnold Schwarzenegger has a role -- maybe as Heimdall.

Posted by dubiousraves | May 8, 2008 2:44 PM

Iron Man is third-tier in my book, roughly level with Thor and Daredevil and the Flash and the Surfer. The top tier are the Big Three, but there's a bubbling-under layer of Hulk-F4-Captain America-X-men who are clearly a tier above Tony Stark in the public consciousness.

These tiers imply absolutely nothing about quality, by the way. I'm a Hellblazer fan, so I waited aeons for a movie, and then got Keanu Reeves. Life really sucks. He'll probably get cast as Morpheus as well, if they ever do the Sandman.

Posted by Dr Devlin | May 9, 2008 6:50 AM