I really love both these characters but lets look at the facts. Captain Marvel is a being that is almost Superman's equal. Superman has invulnerablility and maybe strength over the Captain but Marvel has that lovely power of Zeus that Kal-El's invulnerablity is useless against. We all seen what the lightning did to a Superman with maximum invulnerablity in Kingdom Come. About a dozen hits of the lightning and Superman would be softened up enough for the strength of Hercules to put him down. What do you guys think?
1) "Dude With Magic Lightning > Superman" isn't really under debate. It's just accepted.
2) Why is this in General?
I suppose I could have posted this in Comics, oh well. Reason I posted, was watching Justice League episode, "Clash" and was venting because they have Supes besting Marvel, which is just wrong. I wanted to see Marvel humble Kal, damit! :angry:
*sigh*
do we have to do this every time?
For the last...
Captain Marvel's lightning has NO MAGICAL PROPERTIES BEYOND TRANSFORMING HIM INTO THE CAPTAIN.
Meaning, that a side by side comparison with normal lightning to anyone else would be identical. In Greek Mythology (where the basis of Cap's power more or less is) Zeus threw EVERY bolt of lightning, that doesn't make lightning magical.
If Marvel really had Magic Lightning, then just one bolt would have killed Supes...ripped right through his invulnerability and flash-fried him. Didn't happen. What DID happen was after 6 or 7 strikes of lightning, Supes was STILL fast enough and strong enough to grab and restrain him.
Storm of the X-men could put a hurting on Superman by throwing lightning at him. Did you even watch the Superman of the animated universe? He was ALWAYS getting zapped by electricity. Livewire almost had him down, for cripes' sake. Thor commands lightning too, but it's not magic lightning either.
I've heard this exact argument about Thor too. That just because Mjolnir is a magical weapon that makes everything it does magic too.
That's like saying that Sunlight is magical, just because it kills vampires. Thor doesn't command magic wind. Unless it's the Winds of Watoomb that Dr Strange calls up from another dimension. Magic, by its very definition is energy that exists outside of the laws of nature.
Don't feel bad...professional comics writers even make this mistake. There are tons of examples in print of both sides of this debate.
Ok, here's 2 situations...
Thor vs Superman.
1) Thor hits Superman with Mjolnir.
2) Thor hits Superman with a regular Sledgehammer.
In both examples, Superman would probably get himself a black eye. Because he was hit by THOR. But Mjolnir would probably not suffer any worse for the wear, due to it being a magic hammer made of uru metal, while the Sledge would probably look like that bullet that bounced off Supes' eye.
Captain America, weilding Mjolnir probably not cause Superman much more damage than Cap weilding the Sledge. Because he's friggin' Superman.
Everybody get it now?
and...btw, moving to Comics.
Um, no. Anything magical affects Superman as it would affect a normal person. Hit Superman with Mjolnir, and he goes flying. Hit him with a magic sword, he bleeds.
And you can't say that Marvel's or Thor's lightning isn't itself magical (barring some sort of canonical proof). The ability to call lightning is not natural. You're arguing that the magic is in triggering it, and that the result is natural. But... you can't have lightning without pre-existing conditions (specifically, certain ranges of electric charge in a cloud). Somehow I doubt that the ancient gods or whoever invented the various magical spells and enchantments invented a spell to teleport electrons out of collections of vapor.
I'm not saying my point is necessarily right, but I can definitely back mine up-- read the 3rd issue of Kingdom Come. Supes cuts his finger on Wondy's sword, whose only magical property is having been made by Hephaestus.
Find me some canonical evidence explaining that Thor or Marvel's lightning isn't magic. Or that Mjolnir doesn't clean Supes' clock.
And even then... bah... who cares. The writing's so inconsistent, we can probably find half a dozen pieces of hard, canonical evidence for each side. As you said, the writers are as confused as we are. However... that DOESN'T mean you're right, and the examples that contradict you are wrong. It means we're both right and both wrong due to DC's lazy, butchered continuity. The whole idea of having a "weakness" is insane and illogical, and attempting to reason it out is futile.
Yet more evidence that Marvel > DC. Name me one Marvel character with a "weakness".
Well, I can't name you just one, because they all have the same weakness......bad writing. (ha, at least now-a-days, but DC suffers the same affliction)
Actually, on that note, I'd tighten it up a bit and say that the collective weakness of all DC and Marvel heroes is continuity. Arguments like this one about Superman are stupid and shouldn't have to happen. The stories should be coherent and internally consistent. Unfortunately, writers come and go, and pay varying amounts of attention to canon, so we get butchered continuity.
The only two comics I read now are Invincible and The Ultimates. They're not especially noteworthy in any way, but the fact that they're not dragged down by decades of continuity lets the writers write what they want (and, depending on your opinion, what should be written to properly tell the story), making much cleaner stories.
There was a Wizard article a couple years back asking if Marvel should Ultimize their entire universe. I didn't think so at the time, but with a couple more years of perspective on the issue, I think it's a great idea. Not so much that they all need to become gritty, realistic stories, but rather, they all just need to snip off the history and start fresh.
Continuity kills comics.
As I have already said, there are examples a'plenty to support both sides of the debate. And I'm not saying I'm right, rather that the other way of thinking makes no sense.
And yes, I had just re-read Kingdom come #4 as I was typing the previous post, to make sure I had my info straight.
Cap Marvel's "Magic lightning" should have blasted through Superman like the Ersatz-Thor's blast did to Black Goliath in Civil War. It didn't.
A Magic Hammer akin to a magic sword should have crushed Superman's skull, then when weilded by Thor.
It's not natural to create/call lightning where before there was none, but Storm's been doing that for years, and she's not magical. Unless she's calling forth Zeus's magic bolts.
Thor is the God of Thunder. That means he Commands the storms. He does not create Magic storms, he magically creates regular ones.
Yes, Wonder Woman's sword was made by a god, as Mjolnir was, but her sword's magical properties were to be strong and sharp. If her sword's magical abilities were strictly limited to it glowing blue, it wouldn't pierce his hide any more than any ordinary sword. Batman, weilding Wondy's sword would probably still cut him. Batman with Thor's hammer wouldn't send him flying across the room (unless Mjolnir is a "Hammer of Knockback"). yet, both are magic weapons.
That's all I'm saying. magic, in and of itself, doesn't always immediately negate Superman's invulnerability.
Just like Kryptonite doesn't. Kryptonite just makes him weak, and does not mean he can be shot with kryptonite bullets. Sorry. It doesn't work that way. And yes, I am well aware that it has been written that way numerous times. That's why it drives me crazy. It's sloppy. A Superman that's been around the stuff for awhile, long enough for it to sap his strength, sure, maybe he can get stabbed by Kevin Spacey with a kryptonite shiv. but a full power Supes getting shot from a distance, would still bounce right off his hide like any other rock.
As for the Ultimate Line, I only really have one problem with it...The writers are not trying to be new and fresh. Across the board, they are all doing the same thing, which is getting the books right in line with regular Marvel continuity. They're using all the same characters, same situations, but writing the stories with the benefit of hindsight, instead of going a new direction. I don't really want to see Ultimate Alcoholic Tony. I could care less about seeing the Ultimate version of Spidey villain A-Z. I want to see how putting these guys in a world closer to the real world would look and feel. Give them some real world situations, and let them be heroic.
Maybe I'm just getting too old to suspend my disbelief...
Quote from: captainspud on February 07, 2007, 11:56:57 PM
Yet more evidence that Marvel > DC. Name me one Marvel character with a "weakness".
Well, there is Hyperion and Gladiator........ :P
About the superman weak vs magic debate I think Protomorph mostly summed it up neatly with the "whatever the magic part does affects him". If something is enchanted to be sharp, it is sharp to superman. If something is enchanted to give you gas, it gives superman gas.
On the other hand something like thors hammer or purely magical bolts of lightning shouldent tear though him like a paper doll because he still has super freakish endurance. Think of it as hitpoints and invulnerability... his invulnerability is ignored by thors hammer so it does a full healthy 50 points of damage... against supermans 300 health.
And yeah, I can picture non magical bolts bringing superman down. Im from the "actually halfway interesting" superman camp instead of the "foaming at the mouth dc fanboy" camp that loves superman flying in and out of supernovas, juggling planets and moving at the speed of light.
And hyperion and Gladiator arent the only one with weaknesses... how about sentry? He's not a superman style character... ;)
But yeah, the idea of having a weakness comes as a failsafe of making your characters more powerful each weak and still being able to tell a non god themed story. I mean superman developed a new super power every month for a while...
every single one of the original marvel characters had a weakness. a real one, one that would make their characters interesting and eventually revolutionary icons.
spider-man - his weakness was that he was still a kid trying t olive up to a sense of duty, responsibility and guilt because of his uncle's death. this weakness caused him to make numerous sacrifices in relationships, wealth, and general well-being
The Hulk - he was his own weakness, his rage made him uncontrollable, creates the whole question that what is a man, or a hero that is controlled (and depends on) his own rage
Iron Man - his original weakness... his heart, metaphorically having no heart he tries to right wrongs (made i nthe world and by his own company), pursue 'meaningful' relationships (usually only on a physical level, but neglecting the relationships in front of his nose), and ends up driving himself too far... leading to his second weakness, becoming an alcoholic
The Fantastic Four - no overt weaknesses here, but superstardom and vanity lead to internal problems... thing and johnny always fighting over superficial things, mister fantastic being wrapped up (literally and figuratively) in his own supergenius brain, and the invisible girl ... one of the most explicit examples of self-esteem issues ever seen, and her need to connect with people who will acutally see her, like namor or black panther.
but these weaknesses make the characters appear human. i think superman's weakness to magic is just an addendum to the character to convey that... yeah this uber-powerful alien is actually a lot more like us than we realize... otherworldly magic affects him the same way it does us. Writers utilize this in order to make us empathize with the character sometimes... which leads to inconsistent continuity, as different writers employ different tactics in order to get different reactions from the readers.
I say, let continuity become a multi-headed hydra, rejoice in the pre-crisis, post-crisis, 616, ultimate, movie and video game continuities... they are a vast well for creators to draw upon and play with. i want to see willem dafoe tackle ben reilly while spiderboy watches from the sidelines (which happen to be part of the Bleed).
bah, or it might just be koreas finest beer talking.
first off i agree noone is right or wrong,poor writing is the culprit, that aside magical lightning is magical. magic used to summon a storm that brings lightning as an attack is not,storm is summoning lightning from the weather or through herself is not
a magic user cast a lightning bolt at superman-he gets no resistance and the bolt will hurt him for the damage(probably full ammount)
storm summons lightning to attack superman and he will first apply his resistance and then takes damage at a reduced ammount
superman is a powerhouse and has alot of health,so most attacks if magical wont rip him apart, but to me there would definetly be a difference as to how much damage superman will take
Quote from: lugaru on February 08, 2007, 04:31:55 AM
On the other hand something like thors hammer or purely magical bolts of lightning shouldent tear though him like a paper doll because he still has super freakish endurance. Think of it as hitpoints and invulnerability... his invulnerability is ignored by thors hammer so it does a full healthy 50 points of damage... against supermans 300 health.
Y'know, I never thought of it in those terms, but that makes sense. Superman's not weak to magic, that place is reserved for kryptonite, mind control, Ma Kent's home cookin', and whatever else those dang writers want to throw in nowadays. He's just not as
invunerable to it as to, say, a bullet.
Here's an example: Let's say a guy shoots 3 bullets at Supes- one regular, one kryptonite, and one magic. The first one would bounce off. No arguement there. The K bullet would not only cut through his skin, it would absorb the yellow sun rays he's absorbed, effectively poisoning him, and, if left untreated, would kill him. The magic bullet, the way I've always interpreted it, would not bounce off, but would not be mortally dangerous. The magic wouldn't prevent him from healing himself in its normal, excellerated rate, unless that's what the magic was supposed to do. But that's a whole different can of worms. In short, the magic one wouldn't kill him, just slow him down.
Now, about the lightning. I've always thought Cap's lightning was magic, while Thor's isn't. Here's my explaination. Unless I'm mistaken (and I could be, I'm not a big Thor follower), Thor's lightning doesn't come out of the Mjolnir, meaning it's coming from a regular storm, magically created. Cap's lightning comes from the Rock of Eternity, possibly Shazam himself, which is the magical source of his, and all of the marvel families', powers. Case in point, when The Rock had to be rebuilt, all of the Marvel's powers stopped working, except for Billy, who had absorbed all of Shazam's abilities. Therefore, since it comes from a magical source, it is magic.
not an expert on cap marvel, but thor -can- shhot lightning -from- mjolnir (god blast anyone) it's influenced by the divine and made in a magical manner, therefore.... magical lightning.
storm manipulates the weather, I presume everyone here knows how lightning occurs in a natural state... hardly a valid comparison.
another comparison to make with thor and cap marvel vs supes, both their bodies are not their own, and actually made from :O magic! so pretty much if cap marvel wanted to hit supes properly, he'd be halfway through supes defences before we even add magical strength into the equasion
I've been part of this conversation before, on this board and other places, but I'll wade into the fray again. If I get an enchanted hammer with the magic effect that it can turn into a banana, a lot of people on this board seem to be of the opinion that I could then beat Superman with it. Those people, in short, are wrong. Though some writers don't understand this either, the way it works is as : if the effect of magic is directly damaging, Superman's powers still apply, whether it's lightning, magic hammers, energy blasts, whatever; if the magic has another effect, say transformation, or teleportation, Superman is just as vulnerable to those effects as a normal human being.
Evidence of this: as demonstrated in Kingdom Come, the big source cited by the OP and many others, Cap Marvel hits Superman with the lightning multiple times, and Superman still isn't down for the count; it hurt him, somewhat. Remember, this is lightning powerful enough that it breaches the atomic warhead's force field, a field designed to withstand the powers of all known superhumans. That should be enough to hurt Superman to some degree, leaving magic out of the equation all together.
Now, if you are of the belief that magic negates Superman's powers, then he should be a dead, charred corpse. A normal person would be after multiple massive lightning strikes. Some people will argue that it's only Superman's invulnerability that is negated, that his massive endurance lets him take those several hits; however, his massive endurance is a function of his powers as well: why should one be ignored by magic and not the other?
This view is complicated by Superman getting nicked by Wonder Woman's sword though, also in Kingdom Come. The real problem, as many have noted, is that this 'weakness' or 'vulnerability' to magic has never been clearly defined by DC - either Superman should have been killed by Marvel's lightning, or not cut by WW's sword. Take your pick.
I have never said that Captain Marvel's summoned lightning had NO magical properties. It does. But only one: It carries the transformative power that -only- applies to members of the Marvel Family. Or else it would have granted Superman those abilities. It therefore only should have, to all other people, the qualities of typical lightning.
That Captain Marvel has powers fueled by magic, doesn't mean that a punch from him goes straight through Superman's defenses. They've fought several times, and it has never been portrayed like that. Cap Marvel puts a hurting on Supes, but not because of the magic, but because of his immense strength. If Cap Marvel had the same powerset, save for the strength (the power of SAZAM!), He would not be able to defeat Superman, even though he is magic.
There's particularly stupid thing that was done in an issue of Superman several years back. Unfortunately, I don't have the issue handy so I can't tell you which writer to blame for this:
Superman gets mesmerized, then bitten, by Count Dracula who intends to turn him into a super-vampire under his control. However, due to some completely lame explanation that has to do with Superman absorbing solar energy, biting Superman causes Dracula to be instantly incinerated as if he were standing in direct sunlight and Supes snaps out of the trance.
So if Superman encounters a vampire all he has to do is stick out his arm (or neck) and say "have a bite" to defeat them. Nevermind the fact his heat vision would likely do the trick.
:rolleyes:
*edit* Proto, if Marvel had the powers of Hazam, he'd be stong but stupid. The `S' is wisdom of Solomon. The strength comes from Hercules.
I did realize that, but you ninja'd me. I was thinking s=strength. :doh:
As for the vampire, I do remember that story. the solar soaked blood did the trick.
I'm not sure when he had met a vampire before that (possibly pre-Crisis?), but I seem to recall breaking fangs against his skin. There is a prime example of writers being stupid and not doing their homework.
setting all of this aside, for the moment, IF Superman had been successfully transformed (it's possible, if you kept him out of the sunlight long enough). Would he incinerate from the sun faster then he regenerated from it? hee hee.
for that matter, would vampires still have to equally fear a red sun?
Isn't Thor's hammer imbued with smashing properties as well? I find it hard to believe that the enchantments that allow a sword, one that was not enhanted to cut through anything, to cut Supes are not allowed for a hammer to hurt him. Does that make sense? I'm in the agreement that magic attacks do full damage, just that he has A LOT of hit points.
Magic is tricky... but it boils down to a form of energy that has a specific purpose attatched to it. A bolt of mystic lightning might not even have the power of intention to electrocute behind it (if that makes sense).
For instance, Circe blasts Wonder Woman with glowing purple lightning, but it doesn't electrocute the surrounding area, it mostly jars Wondy and knocks her back a few feet. Electricity doesn't behave that way! Also no way in Hades could anyone deflect it using metal bracelets (hello!)
The intention the witch had when she cast the spell was to inflict pain and propel force at Diana. That is what the spell did. If Wondy happened to be holding moly (the herb that renders one immune to Circe's spells) the bolt would have bounced off an invisible, spherical aura around her.
Similarly, Captain Marvel in Kingdom Come intended for his magic lightning to strike Supes with magical force, not transformation. It also ended up adding a power to Cap's arsenal that he'd never before demonstrated. If it was regular lightning, Post Crisis Supes would most likely say it tickled. It had its intended effect on Superman because magic always affects Superman the way it is intended to.
Captain Marvel, Thor, and Wonder Woman are all magic-based heroes. Their strength is magic in nature, so wherever DC decides today that they fall in relation to Supes, they'll still have the ability to affect him. I don't believe it when somebody says "Wonder Woman isn't strong enough to affect Superman, nothing can hurt him." Magic spells affect him, magic weapons can cut him, and magically strong beings can hurt him. If a wizard used a spell to give himself super-strength, on the level of Doomsday, then he can certainly hold his own against Superman.
Quote from: Revenant on February 08, 2007, 02:45:39 PM
Captain Marvel, Thor, and Wonder Woman are all magic-based heroes. Their strength is magic in nature, so wherever DC decides today that they fall in relation to Supes, they'll still have the ability to affect him. I don't believe it when somebody says "Wonder Woman isn't strong enough to affect Superman, nothing can hurt him." Magic spells affect him, magic weapons can cut him, and magically strong beings can hurt him. If a wizard used a spell to give himself super-strength, on the level of Doomsday, then he can certainly hold his own against Superman.
But if someone has the strength of Doomsday, it wouldn't really matter if it's source is magical, that person is already strong enough to damage Superman. He's not totally invincible barring magic or kryptonite; Wonder Woman and Capt. Marvel are both strong enough that they could hurt him somewhat, regardless of their magical nature, just as J'onn J'onnz, Darkseid, Mongul, and others are or would be able to hurt him through sheer physical force.
That vampire thing is dumb, how could one bite him?
Worse part is that somebody did the vampire thing before, only different. Any hellblazer fans in the audience? Vampire bites John Constantine and the demon blood (long story) in his veins tears through the vampires jaw like acid. After a nasty humiliation he drags the vampire into the rising sun and that is that.
all this noise about whether the lightning bolts can hurt supes, its been shown in KC that it can, so there is one-up that the captain has on Kal-El. so how about once he gets hit by one of those bolts, he realises they hurt like heck, and he uses that superspeed (thats just below the frickin' flash's level), and MOVES!
seriously, i don't see supes being so dumb as to stick around and take six or seven of them....again...i think that bit in kingdom come was a bit sloppy, the way a guy who can move faster than lightning, thought or reaction stood there for a half dozen of the sparky lil suckers.
Again it comes down to the writing, cos superman never gets to use his powers as effectively as he should.
Lets add to superman all his powers, cos some of you guys are neglecting tha all the captain can do is be strong, tough and fast (and the niggling lightning bolt). the wisdom of solomon? its one thing to be wise, its another to be sly and crafty, its another thing to be tactical. supes went through a lot of training with mongul et al. to increase his ability to use his powers simultaneously. so billy can be tought and fast and strong, and while he does that superman unleashes his incomprable arsenal of abilities on the poor guy.
supes is generally accepted as stronger, faster, tougher, (really, cap is said to be just about supes equal in strength and speed, not his actual equal, while never tested in a pound for pound comparison it is generally accepted) plus his enhanced reactions, superhuman senses, heat vision, arctic breath and the fact that he is just a better fighter. he has been doing the superhero game a lot longer and a lot harder than billy batson. he has fought much deadlier foes and come away the victor. until billy takes down doomsday-multiple times-whoops on imperiex and knocks out the hulk in two pages or less, i have to call in the favour of the last son of krypton.
can the captain fight and react at superspeeds, or just move ie. fly and run?
cos unless he can react at a superhuman like flash and superman can, throwing a thousand punches a second, moving in and out of your attacks at dragonball like superspeed, then its game over, man.
the ability to throw a hundred punches to your opponents one is too huge an advantage. add heat vision et al. and its a no-brainer. If we took away the fact that neither man wants to hurt the other, and just have them fight (not to the death cos neither of them are killers) then the fight really should be over before it starts. One superspeed earth circling uppercut followed by a simultaneous heat vision arctic breath barrage and a flurry of a hundred planet breaking punches per second, and its billy batsons bedtime.
i normally dont post in which hero can beat which, but it seems like people are always taking a shot at my boy supes. Why? all he does is be a paragon of truth and justice, selfless and a symbol of hope and peace...so naturally lets all rag on the character cos writers decided that he is the strongest. well guess what? someone has to be the strongest! if it wasn't Kal it'd be someone else (maybe the captain) would you all takes shots at him then? the captain is as good and wholesome and upstanding as kal-el...just not as vocal or visible. for two characters so simiolar, why is it y'all feel you have to take Superman down a couple of pegs?
While I am one of the ones on Superman's side in this, Capt. Marvel is super-fast as well. Some would argue faster, though those would be weiners.
Well I am a Superman fan as well, but I also like the other characters. I am primarily a Wonder Woman fan and she often gets the shaft when appearing in a Superman title.
As long as DC puts stories out there where "only Superman is good enough" or "Only Superman survives to save the day" or "The Multiverse always starts with a Superman" you are going to have fans of other good, wholesome, truth/justice characters that are resentful. We get it shoved down our throats that Superman is the strongest on a monthly basis. What about the rich variety of other DC heroes? Are they chopped liver?
Marvel I admire because on any given Sunday, one of its powerhouses could take on another. Thor might whoop Hulk's arse but then Captain America could take him down. Only to get beaten by Spidey, who Thor takes down next ish. It's more interesting than "Superman shows up and saves the day. And again tomorrow, and wow, he also saves next week and a week from tuesday."
Testify.
That's why the Timmverse trumps all..........
Quote from: Revenant on February 08, 2007, 05:27:27 PM
Well I am a Superman fan as well, but I also like the other characters. I am primarily a Wonder Woman fan and she often gets the shaft when appearing in a Superman title.
As long as DC puts stories out there where "only Superman is good enough" or "Only Superman survives to save the day" or "The Multiverse always starts with a Superman" you are going to have fans of other good, wholesome, truth/justice characters that are resentful. We get it shoved down our throats that Superman is the strongest on a monthly basis. What about the rich variety of other DC heroes? Are they chopped liver?
Marvel I admire because on any given Sunday, one of its powerhouses could take on another. Thor might whoop Hulk's arse but then Captain America could take him down. Only to get beaten by Spidey, who Thor takes down next ish. It's more interesting than "Superman shows up and saves the day. And again tomorrow, and wow, he also saves next week and a week from tuesday."
But who has the strongest powers shouldn't factor into who is your favourite character, or the one you find most interesting. That Superman is physically more powerful than most heroes doesn't make him a better character; in fact I know many people who say it makes him boring. And while Marvel has its characters typically at closer standings, you can generally say Hulk and Thor are more powerful than Cap and Spidey. Who's stronger between Hulk and Thor, and Cap and Spidey, well, those are subjects for other debates (Hulk and Spidey FTW, though :) ). Marvel does have its uber characters too though, like the Silver Surfer, Gladiator, and the Sentry (the latter two both Superman analogues of course).
I think Superman has been beaten down respectably by Captain Marvel (Kingdom Come) and Wonder Woman (The OMAC Project) ... both physically and with the use of magic (lightning, WW's magic tiara).
If he got beaten down regularly, he wouldn't be Superman ... he'd be, I dunno, Nightwing or Green Arrow, or a similar non-iconic but well-known hero.
I think DC needs Superman to have a vulnerability with magic to give him some decent opponents, instead of having to invent a new Doomsday, Mongul, Lobo, random alien of comparable strength level the audience has never heard of before and cluttering up the DC universe.
I don't have any problem with Superman's non-invulnerability to magic (or vulnerability to kryptonite for that matter), but sometimes writers start using those things as crutches to present him with challenges. As I believe randyripoff has mentioned before, the key to interesting Superman stories is to make sure you don't just give him a striing of problems that he can punch in the face. But, some writers think that the only interesting stories are ones where the hero might lose a physical fight, and that leads to every fourth bad guy being teh uber or using magic or kryptonite or red sun rays or whatever the weakness of the day was.
Ok...Spe's on his soapbox again. Much like Carravaggio, I too am MORE than a little tired of this for the same reason. Not one month goes by that I don't have this debate with someone on a message board or in the comic shop. I've only been collecting for 25 years, and I'd hate to think how fed up even older fans are by this. You mention Thor, Captain Marvel, Silver Surfer, even the Sentry. All of whom are either in or above Superman's power class. Why does EVERYONE have to take pot shots at Superman? I know he is the poster boy of powerhouses in the genre, but this dead horse has been beat into the ground, dug up, flogged, incinerated, scattered, reassembled, cloned, and then beat to death again. You wanna be alternative? You really wanna, fanboy? Then how about post on who could take out Sentry or Thor? Oh, that's right, no one does that. You only show how cool you are if you bash the icons, and then buy a pile of Wolverine and Ultimate books, I forgot. Thor, Sentry, heck, even Hulk could do something in a book that is WELL beyond the norm for them and it's accepted. Sentry has been built up to be as powerful possibly as the Silver Age version of Superman and the fans think that is AWESOME. However, by contrast, Superman displays any power levels close to the silver age or just comes off as powerful in an issue or story arc and the naysayers cry foul. Why is it okay for a Mr. Majestic, Captain Marvel, Thor, or ANYONE able to be powerful and cool, but not Superman? Well, I have the answer: Super-Stigma. It's getting on my nerves and DC is not helping any. I've seen a real rise in this stuff since all the Silver Age stuff has been added back into the mythos of late. Nostalgia is nice kids, but lets all move on to the future and write new stories instead of spending all our time trying to add back a plethora of garbage back into Superman, huh? The debate is not raised against Superman the character, but raised against the Superman stereotype-which the character really isn't anymore-but is fast becoming again with the last Crisis and the guiding hand of Dan Didio. Everything old is still old, and it has it's place: in the past. Perhaps that is the biggest reason: stagnation. Just about all the other characters have evolved and changed over time, but even when changes are promised, DC usually goes right back to business as usual wth the character of Superman. The next time I hear a writer or artist on one of Supes's titles say something like "I don't know why more people don't think the character is cool", they need look no further than themselves.
Well I am more than a little tired of Wonder Woman being depicted as the victim of a crazed Superman in parallel universes (he strangles her with her own lasso in S/B... he apparently gouged out her eye and then killed her recently in an alternate future... )
Diana beat a mind controlled Supes, but she didn't really, because he was about to smear her again if she hadn't cut him and offed Max Lord. "Fanboys" of Supes are still arguning that he KOed her in outer space and only the heat of re-entry woke her up, therefore he won the fight. Her inner monologue clinched it when she said to herself that she "can't beat him."
Well, and now, don't jump all over me for this....but I don't really see how she COULD beat him. I mean, she could hurt him, but he's stronger, MUCH faster, and much more durable. I'm not saying this to spite anyone, as I am perfectly open to any reasonable explainations of a way around this, it's just that I can't think of any.
Yeah she is slightly less strong than him, and he invulnerability is due to the bracelets and isn't as high as his. She makes up for it with the warrior training and her gear. I'd rate them as evenly matched in a fight.
But if there actually is a mandate from DC that no other hero should beat Superman in a fight, then that is one "forth wall" that I can't suspend my disbelief past.
The original script for that Sacrifice fight scene had Diana clearly triumphing over the mind-controlled Supes. Editors changed it so Superman's fans would not have to see him beaten. Mind you, he was being mind-controlled so it wouldn't be a true battle. But the script was changed nonetheless. Now it's a very unclear victory for Diana, but the escape route was killing Max Lord. An act which still plagues her and angered many of her fans. Having been a fan since the Silver Age, I am of the opinion that there is always another way. What Wonder Woman was depicted as doing looked like a cop-out, after a fight with Superman where she admitted he was her superior. If she is second only to Superman in power, that means nobody is his equal. What I'm getting at is, poor writing decisions made the story unsatisfactory when it had the potential to be great.
What supervillain in their right mind would have chosen that career in the DCU?
I like Wonder Woman and thought that, in the post-(1985)Crisis DCU, she was pretty close to Superman in battle, if things were left to fisticuffs. Once you take his other powers into account, he really is too much of a tank mage to beat.
However, it's interesting to me that one of the main complaints people have in this thread (and the many that have come before) is that the writers are inconsistent in defining and using the characters' powers. Yet here there is a complaint that DC may have a mandate that no other hero beats Superman (presumably in a ceteris paribus situation). But, I think that such a mandate (if there is one) may be an effort at consistency. I'll admit that it shows obvious favoritism to Superman, but he is the flagship hero for DC, so what should we expect? It would be a bad idea to have a rigid pecking order (that A always beats B who always beats C and so on), but I at least respect that they are making an effort not to have every random chump trash Superman when the need for a plot device arises. How many people has Wolverine taken down when, realistically, there is just no way?
BTW, I didn't want to wade in to the earlier re-tread of the Superman v. Magic discussion, but the mere fact that Wonder Woman, who is magical from the get-go (unless I am misreading the made-from-clay deal) can't totally whomp Superman means that not all magical things do damage that is strictly magical, even if they themselves are magical or of magical origin. That is, IMO, a factor that the Thorshippers and so on might want to take into account.
I'm okay with Superman having no equal; in fact, I kind of like it. It's not like his close to peers in the DC universe are that far behind him, like Wonder Woman, J'onn, Capt. Marvel, the Flash or Green Lanterns. I mean, each member of the classic Justice League, excepting Batman and Aquaman, are freakin' ridiculous.
QuoteI mean, each member of the classic Justice League, excepting Batman and Aquaman, are freakin' ridiculous.
Actually, seeing that Batman can figure out an answer to any problem, and seems to be a better expert on anything than all the greatest experts in the world combined, besides mastering every physical discipline known, I thinking he belongs in that category too.
At the end of the day, my only real beef is with bad writing.
I actually don't have any problem with the notion that magical atacks do full damage to Superman's ridiculous endurance. But, many people are of the opinion that magical attacks render him a mere human. and THAT is at the core of the issue.
However, I would love for Sentry to actually have some meaningful, heroic adventures that didn't devolve into his being a basket case. I like the character, and I'd like them to actually DO something with him.
Here's a quick vs: Superman vs Sentry.
It'd last about 6 seconds.
"I'm the Man of Steel"
"I have the power of a thousand exploding suns"
"Hey, you power me!"
:D
Quote from: Protomorph on February 11, 2007, 12:49:39 AM
At the end of the day, my only real beef is with bad writing.
I actually don't have any problem with the notion that magical atacks do full damage to Superman's ridiculous endurance. But, many people are of the opinion that magical attacks render him a mere human. and THAT is at the core of the issue.
However, I would love for Sentry to actually have some meaningful, heroic adventures that didn't devolve into his being a basket case. I like the character, and I'd like them to actually DO something with him.
Here's a quick vs: Superman vs Sentry.
It'd last about 6 seconds.
"I'm the Man of Steel"
"I have the power of a thousand exploding suns"
"Hey, you power me!"
:D
Actually I think it'd be like:
"Hey, I'm the Sentry. What's this, a notice from Superman's lawyers to cease and desist? Aww, nuts...."
Quote from: Protomorph on February 11, 2007, 12:49:39 AM
"I'm the Man of Steel"
"I have the power of a thousand exploding suns"
"Hey, you power me!"
:D
"No, they're red suns."
"Ohh, I'm boned!"
ive never been a big dc fan and i'm not that crazy about superman because of his icon status.theyve made him too super.to my limited knowledge theyve never really explained how he can do so many "super" things and be 6'2",240lbs. i guess all youve got to do is say he's an alien and that explains everything.superman could be a better character if dc hadnt dug themselves in a hole with him.he only beat hulk and thor out of popularity.john byrnes superman was the best yet.if a man can move planets why does he need a job?wipe out all crime in a month and then go on vacation.do aliens take vacations?
I agree with you to a point, herodad. Superman was never my favorite hero because he was made out to be too powerful. I mean, when you've got him actually pushing around planets, that's too over the top. When Byrne depowered Superman in Man of Steel, I actually started to like the character more, but since then it seems like he's been powered up again to be over the top once more, but not quite to the extreme that he was pre-Crisis.
As for the comments about Batman that cat made....yeah, I also agree with that. Batman is my favorite hero, but for the past decade+, he's been written as if he's fully capable of taking down almost anyone....even beings who would defeat him in about three seconds in a normal situation......if he has time to plan for it, and his detective skills are portrayed almost as outrageous as pre-Crisis Supes' strength. The physical discipline thing I don't agree with, though; Batman's always been pretty hard to defeat in combat, and its long been established that he's one of the best fighters in the DCU. There are only maybe a handful of fighters more skilled than him, like Lady Shiva. He's also been an expert escape artist for a long time, as well, and that long pre-dates the creation of Mister Miracle.
One ability I don't think has been used in a long time is his ability to go into a coma-like state that can fool people into thinking he's dead by slowing his heartbeat and respiration. Had a comic that came with a record back in the 70's where he did that.
I don't care to comment about Wonder Woman vs. Superman, except to say that I'd give Diana the edge in combat skills easily.
As for Superman vs. Captain Marvel, I see it as this:
Captain Marvel is more or less a rip-off of Superman; DC even sued Fawcett over it and won, which is why the Marvel books stopped being published. Originals always defeat rip-offs.
Who's more popular? Superman. Superman was originally owned by DC, Captain Marvel wasn't. If Marvel wins a fight against Superman, you can bet he's going to get pwned during the rematch or Superman threw the fight for some reason.
I don't know how it is currently, with all the reboots and retconning, but the simple fact is that Captain Marvel is a kid who turns into a superhero, and that's not only his weakness because of the fact he's helpless as Billy Batson and can possibly be tricked into turning back into BB, but because he isn't really a different person as Marvel, he's more naive amongst other things.
I don't know about bats being the best fighter around. There was a website showing a lot of just street thugs pawning Bats with lefts and rights. Not to mention other villains such as Bane and Deathstroke that could whoop him up.
As to Supes, he is way too powerful for my liking. The Batman/Superman where he disentegrated around 40 Doomsday clones with a wide beam x-ray vision blast pretty much ended my taste for him. I did like the 1st few issues of Man of Steel when it seemed like he was getting paid back for 40 years of uberness by villains kicking the tar out of him.
This is why I loved Superboy Prime. He was someone that Supes and the rest of everyone else could not easily dispatch. The quick little fight with Black Adam sealed it for me.
Black Adam "It's magic. It stings huh?"
Superboy Prime "Actually, no."
Or something like that.
Ooh, that's a good argument for the magic vs Supes thing. Black Adam specifically thought that his being magical of nature was going to affect Superboy Prime because he knew that would affect Supes that way. Just, SP was not of this reality and a bit more uber than he was expecting.
Quote from: thanoson on February 16, 2007, 11:44:18 AM
I don't know about bats being the best fighter around. There was a website showing a lot of just street thugs pawning Bats with lefts and rights. Not to mention other villains such as Bane and Deathstroke that could whoop him up.
As to Supes, he is way too powerful for my liking. The Batman/Superman where he disentegrated around 40 Doomsday clones with a wide beam x-ray vision blast pretty much ended my taste for him. I did like the 1st few issues of Man of Steel when it seemed like he was getting paid back for 40 years of uberness by villains kicking the tar out of him.
This is why I loved Superboy Prime. He was someone that Supes and the rest of everyone else could not easily dispatch. The quick little fight with Black Adam sealed it for me.
Black Adam "It's magic. It stings huh?"
Superboy Prime "Actually, no."
Or something like that.
Ooh, that's a good argument for the magic vs Supes thing. Black Adam specifically thought that his being magical of nature was going to affect Superboy Prime because he knew that would affect Supes that way. Just, SP was not of this reality and a bit more uber than he was expecting.
To be fair, Batman being overwhelmed by a lot of street thugs would be realistic, depending on the amount of them. Because even the best fighter in the world isn't going to win....or at least win easily.....if attacked by a dozen people at once. However......
When Bane defeated Batman, he was still tired from fighting a bunch of criminals and hadn't had any sleep for several days. There's no way he would have defeated a freshly rested Batman as easily as he did, and no way he'd have managed to break Batman's back in a situation like that even if he did win.
Deathstroke beating up Batman might be reasonable due to Deathstroke's training and powers. However, I still say that Deathstroke defeating the entire JLA that one time was a load of crap. Kyle and Wally were badly written during that, and about the only JLAer I could see him taking out before the others handed him his head would be Green Arrow.
Oh, and if the rumor about 52 is true, then Superboy-Prime won't really be all that much of a threat if he ever escapes.
Quote from: herodad1 on February 16, 2007, 09:42:01 AM
ive never been a big dc fan and i'm not that crazy about superman because of his icon status.theyve made him too super.to my limited knowledge theyve never really explained how he can do so many "super" things and be 6'2",240lbs. i guess all youve got to do is say he's an alien and that explains everything.superman could be a better character if dc hadnt dug themselves in a hole with him.he only beat hulk and thor out of popularity.john byrnes superman was the best yet.if a man can move planets why does he need a job?wipe out all crime in a month and then go on vacation.do aliens take vacations?
That's why I enjoy the Mark Millton SUPREME POWER hyperion a lot. A lot of people complained about the comic (people talk a lot! Swearing and nudity!) but it is one of the most believable supermen out there. At first his powers are limited to what they are being used for... he could destroy entire countries but he is used to take out enemy tanks and strategic weapons.
Latter Mark free's himself but he just has no clue who the badguys are which makes sense. He was raised to believe that russia and china were the badguys but after maturing (and being betrayed by his country) that just dosent ring true to him anymore. Everyone seems like they have an agenda and they are trying to manipulate him. And he is an alien, and he is lonely. Particularly cool is when he decides that he can go anywhere he wants and do anything he wants, that money and such are no longer an issue because nobody can stop him, he is simply above human rules and law.
Again, this is writing superman WITH HINDSIGHT and I am not saying it is a superior product, but it is really great.
Quote from: herodad1 on February 16, 2007, 09:42:01 AMto my limited knowledge theyve never really explained how he can do so many "super" things and be 6'2",240lbs. i guess all youve got to do is say he's an alien and that explains everything.
:huh:
Of all the legitimate criticisms one might have, this is one of the weakest gripes about Superman I've ever heard.
The explanation is that he's spent decades absorbing yellow solar energy. Does it pass scientific muster? Of course not, just like the explanations for Spider-Man, Green Lantern, or Mr. Fantastic. But, your complaint is that Superman isn't physically big enough?!? How silly is that? If he were physically big enough to do the things he does, he wouldn't be super strong. He would just be a giant with normal strength for his size. I mean, by the same logic one could complain, "The Hulk has never been explained because he's smaller than an elephant and an elephant can't lift the stuff that he does. Oh, that's right: gamma ray mutation. I guess that explains everything." That's no less valid than the alien complaint. The whole point of
super strength is that is
more strength than would be explained by the standard skeletal musculature.
Yeesh.
:banghead:
Quote from: herodad1 on February 16, 2007, 09:42:01 AMjohn byrnes superman was the best yet.
<grumble>
How does Superman logically push a planet around? I mean , I can see how he can lift a tank. He has a form of telekenisis that envelopes the object. Realistically, the pressure that his hands put on the underside of the object should push right through it, especially if he's trying to throw the tank. But his TK would apply the force over a greater area.
But a planet? He has to overcome the mass of the object, and a planet might not be dense enough to keep its shape while said pressure is being applied over such a small area (basically his handprints)
I didn't defend the physics of planet-pushing. I'm just saying that the problem with it is not that Superman is six-two, two-forty.
And, as long as we're at it ;), if you believe the TK can keep a tank or a ship or a building from coming apart, there is no reason it couldn't keep a planet from deforming. It's just a larger application of the same idea.
In the Silver Age days, my issue with the planet pushing wasn't whether Superman was powerful enough to do it. It's never made sense that there is a part of the Earth's surface rigid enough to withstand that mechanical stress, of course. Another big problem, believability-wise, is that pushing a planet out of it's orbit would cause catastrophic destruction on the P-Tr extinction scale and make the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami look like a Sunday afternoon haircut. :blink:
But, it's a comic book. If I am going to give a pass to Norse gods, flying Amazon warrior princesses, and every imaginable variety of physics-defying beneficial mutation, then I can bite my tongue on this, too.
I agree, his size shouldn't really have anything to do with the physics involved. I just wasn't sure if there was a different explanation given aside for the TK field.
For instance, in a JLA story, Superman, Martian Manhunter and Wonder Woman (and possibly others, can't remember) were able to push a planet-sized object, with Diana roping it with the lasso. Supes may have an excuse, but the lasso would have cut a swath right through the planet if it were pulled with enough force.
Ehh, comic books! Can't live with 'em, can't live widdout 'em.
Modern Superman may have experienced a lot of power creep since the Man of Steel reboot, but he's certainly not back at planet-pushing levels. I'm not really sure that DC is still using the TK explanation for Superman's strength. That time in Superman/Batman where Supes incinerated a bunch of Doomsday clones with wide-angle heat vision I justify by assuming they weren't as powerful as the original Doomsday (and that Superman/Batman is generally poorly written in some respects).
I like Superman being extremely powerful (though no stupid Silver-age, made up for one use powers), but it does seem to be more difficult for writers to then write good Superman stories. They do exist though; Superman just needs to be given a problem he can't punch his way out of. If the story requires de-powering Superman to make it compelling, don't write that story for Superman. I also dislike the over-reliance on kryptonite (especially on Smallville, but let's not get into that here), it's lazy writing to throw kryptonite at Superman all of the time. As to red, black, blue and gold kryptonites, they should all get locked in a box, that box dropped in a volcano, the planet that volcano is on should get eaten by Galactus, and the universe that Galactus exists in should be written out of ever existing by a crisis of infinite proportions. Damn, I hate the other colours of kryptonite.
The argument that because Superman is extremely difficult to harm makes his stories less interesting, because you know he's not in danger is a silly one to me, since you know 98% of the time that whatever hero of whatever comic you're reading isn't going to die or lose. If you really think, "oh, this month they're going to kill off Batman!" you need help that I can't give you.
What the... you people don't like Silver-Age Superman? I thought that was when he was at his best.
I love it when Superman has super-everything. Not just physical powers either, but his super-computer brain and all that crap. That's the Superman I would rather read about. Superman is this incredible omnipotent figure. He can just do anything he dang well wants... but he decides to be good.
His most powerful... powers? Super-Restraint and Super-Morality.
But at the same time, I still like to see Captain Marvel kick his arse around a bit. And J'Onn.
As for explaining powers, holy cow guys, it's just comics. I'm not the only one who still loves wonder for wonder's sake, am I?
No, my batman website showed Batman in various fights with just ordinary thugs. Like one or two maybe. Punching him silly. Not like 15 of them. And Deathstroke and Taskmaster would laugh at 15 guys coming at him. So would Cap. He has been shown to not be as good as a fighter than they say he is. Even hal Jordan with his limited fighting skills coldcocked him. Ollie did too BEFORE he got the uber training. I see Ollie as probably being a better fighter than Bats now.
On that Superman Doomsday thing, the clones were still powerful enough to kill Amazons. That means they were not slouches. I don't buy the eye beam thing for a moment. I do enjoy Supreme Power. Really enjoying Ultimate Power.
Thanoson..........that's just plain ludicrious. I can point you to comics where Ollie is taken down by just one or two thugs, and where Hal is dropped by a single punch from Batman. Heck, Deathstroke put Hal out of action with a punch in one comic. The writing is inconsistent. I can also point you to comics where whole armies can't stop Hal, where Ollie can stand in with super villains, and where Bats can dominate any and all comers, crowds, singles, world class martial artists.......When were these comics on your site from? I mean, back in the Golden Age, even Supes had trouble with a couple of gangsters now and then. C'mon, Ollie a more skilled fighter than Bats? Ha....you have to go with the spirit of the character, not any single apperance or group of apperances. It's like taking a single verse of scripture completely out of context.
Silver age Superman makes me throw up in my mouth a little. I mean, Super-hypnosis? Really? Super-kisses? Super-weaving? Super-ventriloquism (from orbit)? Super-landscaping? Super-hunches? Super-friction? Super-woman's intuition? Super make-up? I'm not joking, these were all powers Superman claimed to have at various times during the 50s and 60s. Go to www.superdickery.com (http://www.superdickery.com) to check some out for yourself. People like that kind of thing? I'd rather punch myself in the nuts than read about a character who uses super-ventriloquism and super-hypnosis regularly.
I've got to echo BentonGrey: just because Batman got beaten by low level thugs in one issue doesn't mean he sucks at fighting, I mean, I can cite one issue where he one-shots Lady Shiva.
Quote from: Talavar on February 16, 2007, 09:09:00 PMI'd rather punch myself in the nuts than read about a character who uses super-ventriloquism and super-hypnosis regularly.
:lol: :lol: That may be my favorite quote in quite a while. :lol: :lol:
FWIW, I actually like much of the Silver Age Superman from the early- to mid-eighties; that is still the definitive Superman for me, probably because that's when I first read comics and that's when the Elliot S! Maggin and Alan Moore stories took place. But, there was absolutely a lot of what can be described, by
today's writing standards, as crap.
But, we have to keep in mind that comic books from the 1950s and 60s were really a distinct category of thing than what we are used to today because they were written for
little kids. The adults and even teens who buy comics now weren't a big part of the market then. So, when we complain (as I do from time to time) that those old stories had some physics that didn't work or some powers that changed from month to month or some storylines so rotten that even my dog just sniffs and walks away, we have to take into account that
those stories weren't written for us. The idea of Beppo the Supermonkey might be a great story for someone who believes in the Tooth Fairy.
Of course, the comics industry was a little slow to figure out who their audience was and then was slow to shift gears. And, when they finally did, some would argue that they went too far, changing the nature of the character instead of just clearing away deadwood. But, we can exhume that horse and beat it some more on another day. ;)
I meant The uberly trained Ollie who was taught by the teacher of Deathstroke can beat Batman now.
Batman summary- http://www.pvponline.com/images/batman/
Quote from: thanoson on February 16, 2007, 07:54:50 PM
No, my batman website showed Batman in various fights with just ordinary thugs. Like one or two maybe. Punching him silly. Not like 15 of them. And Deathstroke and Taskmaster would laugh at 15 guys coming at him. So would Cap. He has been shown to not be as good as a fighter than they say he is. Even hal Jordan with his limited fighting skills coldcocked him. Ollie did too BEFORE he got the uber training. I see Ollie as probably being a better fighter than Bats now.
Every single one of those instances is bad writing. Even as far back as the early 40's, Batman has been shown to beat up groups of thugs on a regular basis without breaking a sweat. He has been coldcocked by being struck from behind as plot devices on occasion, and that is believable. One or two thugs beating him up is not. Its seriously bad writing, or should include a thought balloon revealing Bats threw the fight on purpose as part of some kind of plan.
Ollie decking Batman is MAJORLY bad writing, as he was seriously lacking in hand to hand combat skills for most of his career.
Hal knocking out Batman with one punch is bull for many reasons, but it gets a pass due to it happening in GL's own title. Anywhere else, and logically Batman would have dodged or blocked the blow and stomped a mudhole through Hal. I'll give you the main reason why Hal shouldn't have been able to deck Batman: Batman is paranoid, therefore he tends to be on guard even around other heroes, and he had a problem with Hal at the time so there's no reason he wouldn't have had his guard up at the time. Hal throwing a punch at Batman should have resulted in one of three things happening:
1. Batman blocks the punch and decks Hal instead.
2. Batman blocks the punch and judo tosses Hal.
3. Batman blocks the punch and Hal has his arm in a cast for a while.
I'd hazard a guess that the only heroes Batman doesn't keep his guard up around on a regular basis are Superman, Wonder Woman and the members of the Batman Family (ie, Dick, Tim and Barbara).
Anyone with no major hand to hand combat skills beating Batman in a fight or decking him is a load of crap. Especially post-Knightfall\Knightquest, because while recovering he underwent further hand to hand combat training by Lady Shiva, who is supposed to be one of the best fighters on the planet. Plus, unlike most heroes, Batman isn't afraid to fight dirty when necessary. Closest comparison I can make is that he's more or less a streetfighter with some ninja skills, but that isn't correct as he's trained in several different styles of martial arts, not just street fighting and ninjitsu. He uses judo moves on a fairly regular basis, for instance, and has been shown to have been trained in boxing and wrestling.
And I'm sorry, but even trained by the guy who taught Deathstroke, Ollie should still lose to Batman in a fight. Deathstroke only really has an advantage in a fight with Batman due to his powers, not his fighting skills. Take away Slade's powers, and I'd give Batman the edge in a fight due to physical conditioning and age.
I'd like to see John Byrne do a run on Batman (NOT A REBOOT!!). Heck, he's already done runs on Superman and Wonder Woman. But I know from posts he's made on his forums that he's been offered Batman before and turned it down.
Quote from: stumpy on February 16, 2007, 11:05:32 PM
FWIW, I actually like much of the Silver Age Superman from the early- to mid-eighties; that is still the definitive Superman for me, probably because that's when I first read comics and that's when the Elliot S! Maggin and Alan Moore stories took place. But, there was absolutely a lot of what can be described, by today's writing standards, as crap.
Glad I made you laugh stumpy, but it's true. :D When I think of Silver Age, my cut-off is traditionally the later 70s. I know the Superman of the later 70s and the 80s isn't really very distinct from the earlier Superman, but comics as a whole had started to shift away tonally from the Silver Age. You could really see this in the change of Batman from Adam West campiness to a much more serious character, and the rise of anti-hero characters, many of which stem from the 70s, but it was present in Superman comics as well.
I think it's possible for any normal human character to get hit by a punch thrown by surprise. Hal and Ollie connecting with punches to Batman I accept; I don't think either of them is his match in a fist fight. I still wouldn't put the better-trained Ollie at Batman's level, as Batman's been training for most of his life, and Deathstroke is a superior fighter due to powers, not pure training.
Even the best fighter should get surprised by a cold-cock every once in a while. Batman's not superhuman, after all and even if he is paranoid of some of the Leagers, he should still be surprised. His adrenaline wouldn't be pumping and he might be in a relaxed state.
Quote from: Talavar on February 17, 2007, 11:31:36 AMQuote from: stumpy on February 16, 2007, 11:05:32 PMFWIW, I actually like much of the Silver Age Superman from the early- to mid-eighties; that is still the definitive Superman for me, probably because that's when I first read comics and that's when the Elliot S! Maggin and Alan Moore stories took place. But, there was absolutely a lot of what can be described, by today's writing standards, as crap.
Glad I made you laugh stumpy, but it's true. :D When I think of Silver Age, my cut-off is traditionally the later 70s. I know the Superman of the later 70s and the 80s isn't really very distinct from the earlier Superman, but comics as a whole had started to shift away tonally from the Silver Age. You could really see this in the change of Batman from Adam West campiness to a much more serious character, and the rise of anti-hero characters, many of which stem from the 70s, but it was present in Superman comics as well.
That's a good point. The historical meeting of Grim and Gritty ushered in a real change in comics. Arguably one of the best Superman stories is Moore's pre-Byrne finale and the tone there is clearly darker than 99% of the epoch it closed. And, of course, the several years before showed some of the same influence, from the more serious Luthor in the Power Suit and space ship Brainiac all the way to Kara's death in
Crisis.
And I enjoyed the change. I think the stories were of much higher quality, though I think that's more because the writers decided to write for a more sophisticated reader. But, through all that, something that I really liked about the Superman character is that he was still a hero motivated by the desire to do good in the world. He never became a vengeful hero out to hurt the bad guys or a character whose worldview was that "people are animals and I am their cage." He was stll Superman, endowed with ridiculous power, but that power tempered by his fundamental decency. And by the understanding of his limitations gained by growing up as an orphan, one who twice saw his parents die before his eyes while he was helpless to save them.
Anyway, I could go on, but that was the Superman I think of from the Silver Age. I liked him.
BTW,
Quote from: Talavar on February 16, 2007, 06:49:11 PMThe argument that because Superman is extremely difficult to harm makes his stories less interesting, because you know he's not in danger is a silly one to me, since you know 98% of the time that whatever hero of whatever comic you're reading isn't going to die or lose. If you really think, "oh, this month they're going to kill off Batman!" you need help that I can't give you.
I agree totally. I used to have this argument with fans of the Byrne-reboot all the time. Of course, the rebooted Superman was still hard to hurt, but Byrne took things a step beyond when he said that one of the big reasons he ditched the Superboy aspect of Superman was that the stories lacked dramtic tension because the reader already knew Superboy would survive. And this from someone who was brought in to refocus the character as one appealing to the modern, sophisticated comic audience! Dramatic tension? Puh-lease. Even a few years later when sales were in the toilet and they had to kill Superman as a gimmick to revive readership, no one actually thought that the character would really
stay dead.
I think that's a big part of what I like about Superman too, stumpy. A character that exists in a semi-realistic world, where bad things can happen to good people, but one who's powerful enough that it doesn't happen on his watch. I think Modern Superman is at this place right now; I really enjoyed the Kurt Busiek/Geoff Johns run of One Year Later stories collected as Up, Up, and Away!, and I think the character of Superman is in a good place right now.
CM's a ripoff of Supes right? So existentially, Supes will always win, because he was the first! With all the elseworlds, and the all star 'verse, I've given up trying to figure out if he's GA/SA Byrna/A, Timm, etc. etc. He was the first, so he's the best. See how that works?
Quote from: stumpy on February 17, 2007, 02:50:18 PMEven a few years later when sales were in the toilet and they had to kill Superman as a gimmick to revive readership, no one actually thought that the character would really stay dead.
Only the speculators and the general unknowing public when it was reported over all the major new organizations. So many people had thought that it was Superman's final live appearance, that book skyrocketted in perceived value. I sold mine a couple of weeks after I bought it at cover price for $75. I just knew there'd be an announcement of his return. I'm sure those that held on to their issues (or even bought them at inflated prices) are kicking themselves now that you can find it in the bargain box. :lol: