Of course, all of it, or I wouldn't comment, just as I wouldn't comment on Green Lantern. It wasn't a very good story IMO.Have you read the comic? *KnightFall*
This is exactly why there is little point arguing without a common agreement on what Character Driven actually means in this discussion. Just because a story questions a character on an emotional level doesn't mean that the story is structured around internal conflicts and obstacles. That is the technical definition of Character Driven, not just my definition. The internal wants and needs of the character are what drive the story, and the internal pulls of inner conflict are what define the obstacles. The plot is almost always an external thing to the character, but the plot in a character driven story arises from internal conflict, everything hinges upon how the plot impacts that internal conflict and reflects that internal conflict. Every action taken by the protagonist is a reflection of one of the pulls of this inner conflict. It isn't about individual instances in a story it is about the entire structure of the story.Because its made very clear that Bruce is challenged on an emotional and psychological level all throughout that story.I mean, in Batman #489, there's an entire conversation between Bruce and Shondra Kinsolving concerning his emotional and physical fatigue. The entire point of Bane was to challenge Bruce on a fundamental level and make him question if he, as Bruce, can still handle the emotional and physical toll of being Batman. That is the definition of character-driven.
The problem with the way you seek to define Character Driven removes this important distinction. By pointing at stories that contain internal struggles you are ignoring where the struggles are coming from and what part they play in the overall structure. The vast majority of plot driven stories will include things that impact the character and their personal issues. That doesn't necessarily mean that the story is seeking to address those issues as the key element of the story.
Most superhero stories seek to avoid this because the nature of the hero's original inner conflict actually defines the character. This is why origin stories often make better movies. Because they are actually about the inner change that occurred in the character — the conflict that defined them as heroes. From that point on it isn't easy to continue with character driven stories because it risks changing the character again, or just rehashing what was already defined.
And again I reiterate. I am not saying every Marvel story is character driven and that no DC stories are. A lot of your energy is arguing against a point I am not making.
On one level absolutely. They are all heroic adventure stories with a wish fulfilment element, concerned with a struggle between right and wrong or good and evil. But to deny their differences and to argue with somebody who has a clear taste for one and not the other is counterproductive. If you are interested in why some of us find the approach different then you need to do more than assert that there are no differences. You need to pay attention to how we are expressing our tastes and the overall feeling we are seeking to explain.The point that I'm making is that Marvel and DC have been telling similar enough stories for a long enough time now that their "standard modes" as you called it are essentially the same.
Enough to have a clear preference for Marvel. Bear in mind I have no problem with you liking both equally, or preferring different things to me. You seem to be affronted that I see this difference of taste and prefer one.Well, how much DC stuff have you read? As someone who has read a lot of both, I can say that there's really not much of a difference. Again, they trade off in writers all the time.