Thought Exercise: Is Spider-Man more of a DC than a Marvel?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Much like Norman Osborn with Spider-Man, and they both wear green and purple in their battle attire.

Luthor is an example of a character who has this outsize reputation as this great supervillain but on the whole I just don't get him as a character. I don't think he's a good villain. He's excellent in some stories, and the Clancy Brown version from the Justice League cartoons was awesome, but Superman has many better villains than Luthor like Brainiac, Bizarro, Toyman, and above all Mr. Mxyzsptlk. Norman Osborn is a more compelling and effective villain than Luthor. There I said it. The DC Universe didn't have a lot of edge when Luthor was POTUS compared to Norman being Head of HAMMER. And the story where Luthor got impeached was a pretty bad and shallow one, like it happened in some B-title and not even in a proper event.

Other people argue that Luthor's real Marvel counterpart is Dr. Doom but Doom is infinitely better as a character and a person than Luthor. Dr. Doom really is a multifaceted character, the guy who believes that since he should rule the world it's also his duty to chip in and save the world now and again. The whole humanist angle that people try and pit Lex in never made sense to me. I usually disagree a lot with Mark Waid but I do agree with him that the Mad Scientist, cake-stealing Luthor is a more entertaining villain than the businessman guy. Doom you can do stories where he kicks back and runs Latveria or the world as in Emperor Doom, but Luthor running Lexcorp is a bore.

[Confuzzled]

I usually disagree a lot with Mark Waid but I do agree with him that the Mad Scientist, cake-stealing Luthor is a more entertaining villain than the businessman guy.

And yet, businessman Luthor is ever relevant.

Also, Lex has had far more decades and appearances than Norman so it makes sense that his showings aren't as consistent as Osborn's.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

And yet, businessman Luthor is ever relevant.

Being "relevant" doesn't make for being an effective villain. Having a character sorta reflect some topical beat and figure of import doesn't by itself lead to better stories. POTUS Lex didn't lead to great stories for DC and the characters because it didn't go far enough. It was a daring stunt and so on but then Luthor is just there and he didn't become a character until he torpedoed his political career by acting like an idiot.

The last good story with Luthor was 52.

[Confuzzled]

Being "relevant" doesn't make for being an effective villain. Having a character sorta reflect some topical beat and figure of import doesn't by itself lead to better stories. POTUS Lex didn't lead to great stories for DC and the characters because it didn't go far enough. It was a daring stunt and so on but then Luthor is just there and he didn't become a character until he torpedoed his political career by acting like an idiot.

I think someone at DC editorial discouraged the "Lex as POTUS" storyline from becoming too daring. The end seems too much of a copout to have been planned from the start.

Things may be different if the concept was tackled now.

[Lee]

I think as far as Spider-Man is concerned the spinoff characters don't really serve the inherent narrative of Spider-Man well unless you kill Peter off.

I agree. I'd go further and say that Peter is the inherent narrative of Spider-Man, so killing him off doesn't work either.

Superior Spider-Man was clever and worked because it was about Doctor Octopus usurping the life and identity of Peter Parker. The new Superior Spider-Man series doesn't really have any reason to exist, beyond "this sold well in the past". It should have been a Superior Octopus series.

[Frontier]

Luthor is an example of a character who has this outsize reputation as this great supervillain but on the whole I just don't get him as a character. I don't think he's a good villain. He's excellent in some stories, and the Clancy Brown version from the Justice League cartoons was awesome, but Superman has many better villains than Luthor like Brainiac, Bizarro, Toyman, and above all Mr. Mxyzsptlk. Norman Osborn is a more compelling and effective villain than Luthor. There I said it. The DC Universe didn't have a lot of edge when Luthor was POTUS compared to Norman being Head of HAMMER. And the story where Luthor got impeached was a pretty bad and shallow one, like it happened in some B-title and not even in a proper event.

Other people argue that Luthor's real Marvel counterpart is Dr. Doom but Doom is infinitely better as a character and a person than Luthor. Dr. Doom really is a multifaceted character, the guy who believes that since he should rule the world it's also his duty to chip in and save the world now and again. The whole humanist angle that people try and pit Lex in never made sense to me. I usually disagree a lot with Mark Waid but I do agree with him that the Mad Scientist, cake-stealing Luthor is a more entertaining villain than the businessman guy. Doom you can do stories where he kicks back and runs Latveria or the world as in Emperor Doom, but Luthor running Lexcorp is a bore.

Most people write Luthor as a multi-layered villain, be it as a menacing and petty mad scientist, an unscrupulous and amoral businessman, and the Machiavellian schemer and organizer.

I think what he brings to the table is something those villains you cited can't. Aside from Brainiac and Mxy on a bad day none of them have been the threat to Superman that Luthor is.

[Agent Z]

Luthor is an example of a character who has this outsize reputation as this great supervillain but on the whole I just don't get him as a character. I don't think he's a good villain. He's excellent in some stories, and the Clancy Brown version from the Justice League cartoons was awesome, but Superman has many better villains than Luthor like Brainiac, Bizarro, Toyman, and above all Mr. Mxyzsptlk. Norman Osborn is a more compelling and effective villain than Luthor. There I said it. The DC Universe didn't have a lot of edge when Luthor was POTUS compared to Norman being Head of HAMMER. And the story where Luthor got impeached was a pretty bad and shallow one, like it happened in some B-title and not even in a proper event.

Other people argue that Luthor's real Marvel counterpart is Dr. Doom but Doom is infinitely better as a character and a person than Luthor. Dr. Doom really is a multifaceted character, the guy who believes that since he should rule the world it's also his duty to chip in and save the world now and again. The whole humanist angle that people try and pit Lex in never made sense to me. I usually disagree a lot with Mark Waid but I do agree with him that the Mad Scientist, cake-stealing Luthor is a more entertaining villain than the businessman guy. Doom you can do stories where he kicks back and runs Latveria or the world as in Emperor Doom, but Luthor running Lexcorp is a bore.

The story where Luthor got impeached was a bad one. It doesn't mean him being POTUS itself was a bad story and didn't serve as an interesting status quo. Norman as Hammer doesn't come close to that and that entire event was a lampshade about how Norman was completely out of his depth as a major antagonist to the entire MU.

Doom isn't a better person than Lex. He'd be deluded enough to think he is and Lex would point out that the only difference between the two of them is Lex knows he's an *******.

Saying that Luthor is a bad villain because a story about running LexCorp isn't interesting to read about is a weak argument. No one would be interested in reading about Bruce Wayne running Wayne Enterprises. And Luthor has also saved the world.

[Agent Z]

Over the decades, many DC characters have become more Marvel-ish and many Marvel characters have become more DC-ish. It's unfortunate all around, making for a more homogeneous genre and industry.

In particular, I don't think the plethora of similarly powered spin-off characters serves the Marvel Universe well. The teen sidekicks, female counterparts and Earth-2 counterparts are so very DC. As is all of the super-heroes being buddies and knowing each other's secret identities.

The Fantastic Four, the first Marvel super team, knew each other's identities. And Marvel heroes have been friends for a long time.

[Frontier]

The story where Luthor got impeached was a bad one. It doesn't mean him being POTUS itself was a bad story and didn't serve as an interesting status quo. Norman as Hammer doesn't come close to that and that entire event was a lampshade about how Norman was completely out of his depth as a major antagonist to the entire MU.

We got a solid Superman/Batman animated movie out of it .

Saying that Luthor is a bad villain because a story about running LexCorp isn't interesting to read about is a weak argument. No one would be interested in reading about Bruce Wayne running Wayne Enterprises. For that matter, Luthor has also saved the world.

I dunno. I wish we saw Bruce Wayne doing more with Wayne Enterprises sometimes...

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I think what he brings to the table is something those villains you cited can't. Aside from Brainiac and Mxy on a bad day none of them have been the threat to Superman that Luthor is.

Have you read Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? Luthor is pretty much a non-entity there. And that's considered by a lot of people to be the best Superman story.

The story where Luthor got impeached was a bad one. It doesn't mean him being POTUS itself was a bad story and didn't serve as an interesting status quo. Norman as Hammer doesn't come close to that and that entire event was a lampshade about how Norman was completely out of his depth as a major antagonist to the entire MU.

But we got a lot of good stories with Norman as Head of HAMMER -- Dark Reign, Thunderbolts, Fraction/Larocca's opening arc in Iron Man which has him outright winning over Tony and only backing out for the sake of PR, SIEGE.

We got nothing remotely like that with POTUS Lex. Ideally a Potus Lex story should do that too, show him as being totally out of his depth as President and unsuited to being a major antagonist for DC.

Doom isn't a better person than Lex. He'd be deluded enough to think he is and Lex would point out that the only difference between the two of them is Lex knows he's an *******.

Doom would not give a damn what Lex thinks of him. He knows baldy isn't fit to shine his shoes. And Luthor in fact isn't fit to shine Doom's shoes.

I accept and acknowledge that Luthor is a classic villain and so on, but I just don't get him. I think him being a major antagonist has weakened Superman's overall story. You can definitely see this in the live action movies where every villain is either Luthor or Zod with maybe one or two exceptions. I will say that Luthor is better than Zod though.

[Frontier]

Have you read Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? Luthor is pretty much a non-entity there. And that's considered by a lot of people to be the best Superman story.

I thought it was a solid story but I don't think it should be taken as a complete representation of Luthors efficacy as a villain (and there are lot of "the best Superman story" considerations).

We got nothing remotely like that with POTUS Lex. Ideally a Potus Lex story should do that too, show him as being totally out of his depth as President and unsuited to being a major antagonist for DC.

Well, looks like they're doing the complete opposite with Year of the Villain.

Doom would not give a damn what Lex thinks of him. He knows baldy isn't fit to shine his shoes. And Luthor in fact isn't fit to shine Doom's shoes.

Luthor and Doom would be like those two guys who are so similar but act like they aren't and don't get along because of it .

I accept and acknowledge that Luthor is a classic villain and so on, but I just don't get him. I think him being a major antagonist has weakened Superman's overall story. You can definitely see this in the live action movies where every villain is either Luthor or Zod with maybe one or two exceptions. I will say that Luthor is better than Zod though.

I mean, Superman isn't the only movie franchise that's re-used it's main villain ad-nauseam.

[Lee]

The Fantastic Four, the first Marvel super team, knew each other's identities.

The Fantastic Four don't have secret identities.

What I'm talking about is Series A Protagonist knowing the secret identity of Series B Protagonist. In the case of The X-Men, all the heroes were designed for the same series.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

We got nothing remotely like that with POTUS Lex. Ideally a Potus Lex story should do that too, show him as being totally out of his depth as President and unsuited to being a major antagonist for DC.

I think the difference there is that Lex, for all his faults, is at least competent. And I don't know, I actually quite enjoyed the opening arc of Superman/Batman.

Doom would not give a damn what Lex thinks of him. He knows baldy isn't fit to shine his shoes. And Luthor in fact isn't fit to shine Doom's shoes.

I love Victor as much as the next guy, but I don't necessarily think he's an inherently better villain than Luthor. I'd actually say they're incredibly similar and ultimately their plans tend to fall apart for similar reasons and flaws in their personalities. Plus, Victor at his heart tends to be incredibly insecure at times. So, I think he probably would care what someone like Lex thinks about him.

I accept and acknowledge that Luthor is a classic villain and so on, but I just don't get him. I think him being a major antagonist has weakened Superman's overall story. You can definitely see this in the live action movies where every villain is either Luthor or Zod with maybe one or two exceptions. I will say that Luthor is better than Zod though.

I think that stories like the Einstein Connection, the Luthor: Man of Steel miniseries, the Black Ring, Public Enemies, 52, etc. show off all the aspects of Luthor's character that make him a great villain: his greed, his ruthlessness, his obsessive need to be show the world that he's one of the "good" guys, and ultimately, his humanity.

[Agent Z]

Have you read Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? Luthor is pretty much a non-entity there. And that's considered by a lot of people to be the best Superman story.

And there are plenty of Superman stories with Luthor that fans like.

We got nothing remotely like that with POTUS Lex. Ideally a Potus Lex story should do that too, show him as being totally out of his depth as President and unsuited to being a major antagonist for DC.

Luthor isn’t anywhere near as unstable as Norman.

I accept and acknowledge that Luthor is a classic villain and so on, but I just don't get him. I think him being a major antagonist has weakened Superman's overall story. You can definitely see this in the live action movies where every villain is either Luthor or Zod with maybe one or two exceptions. I will say that Luthor is better than Zod though.

I’m sorry, how many times have we had Doom as an FF movie villain? Hell, at least there are incarnations of Luthor that are liked by the general public that doesn’t read comics.

[Agent Z]

The Fantastic Four don't have secret identities.

What I'm talking about is Series A Protagonist knowing the secret identity of Series B Protagonist. In the case of The X-Men, all the heroes were designed for the same series.

Daredevil learned of Spider-Man's secret identity all the way back in the 80s just for example. Bruce Banner was outed as the Hulk all the way back in the 60s.