Does Batman frustrate you?

[JAK]

As Ive said, the common person adores Superman. You'll get a few jokes about the underwear or how he's so unbeatable he's boring, etc etc., but end of the day? Clark moves more t-shirts and merchandise than almost anyone, including the big name movie stars. That's how popular Superman and his legend are; it takes the combined effort of all the Avengers to sell more stuff than him.

It's not that Superman has become unpopular; it's that DC has ****d up for thirty years and have proven to the direct market that his books aren't worth reading because of DC's incompetence. The people who don't follow the direct market? They still love Superman and will flock to support him....until low quality drives them off. But they show up, every time, hoping to get what they and the character still deserve.

Perfectly said.

[Kuwagaton]

(i didn't know, we can say ***** )

The problem is that not only do people get carried away in applying such terms, but it leads others to find rude terminology more acceptable. I never have to edit just a single post. Please take up the offer linked in my sig.

In Champions Online some guys got together to try celebrating it, and pretty much no one showed up.

Haha, thank you.

I'd actually push back on this a bit. The sensible outcome has absolutely been lost on many an average person. Gurz is joking with "Superman will always be Batman's B!+c#" but there's quite a number of people who believe that with no qualifier. In that way, the ant has become the elephant.

I mean I can only speak for myself but I'll go with it as long as there are people who specifically cite Superman's overpowered status as a barrier to their enjoyment.

Possibly - but that would have to take into account the Silver Age stories/etc, back when the idea of Batman taking on Superman wasn't a seriously considered idea.

"Seriously" is always a difficult term to apply to silver age DC. That idea was much less prevalent in an era all about reusing plots yeah, but something they still tried. I did in fact snatch up WFC 143 today... to the best of my knowledge the first actual fight not just used to sell from the cover. An insecure Batman decks a depowered Superman, and then manages to beat the brakes off him in the ensuing duel when our guy decides not to kick his friend when he's down. Mostly what I've seen in reprints were just whether or not either was up to the task when put on an even keel, but the idea of competition was there.

But what I mention is why I take issue with the anti post crisis sentiment that pops up. "Oh he's a rustic doormat." Bronze age writers like Maggin were the ones who suggested that Batman was the proportionately superior hero and have you ever seen satellite era Superman pull rank?

[Citizen Kane]

I'm a fan of both Superman and Batman, so I can't really say I'm frustrated by one or the other. However, I have noticed that plenty a writer misuses Supes when Batman shares panels with him. It seems that Supes gets dumbed-down, or Bats gets overpowered; it's quite annoying.

[stargazer01]

I'd actually push back on this a bit. The sensible outcome has absolutely been lost on many an average person. Gurz is joking with "Superman will always be Batman's B!+c#" but there's quite a number of people who believe that with no qualifier. In that way, the ant has become the elephant.

Keep telling a child he's stupid and can do nothing right, and after a while the child starts to believe. DC keeps telling us Batman is so badass and everything he says is the law, and I see many people believing he's the greatest DC hero and what he says is the truth.

As Ive said, the common person adores Superman. You'll get a few jokes about the underwear or how he's so unbeatable he's boring, etc etc., but end of the day? Clark moves more t-shirts and merchandise than almost anyone, including the big name movie stars. That's how popular Superman and his legend are; it takes the combined effort of all the Avengers to sell more stuff than him.

It's not that Superman has become unpopular; it's that DC has ****ed up for thirty years and have proven to the direct market that his books aren't worth reading because of DC's incompetence. The people who don't follow the direct market? They still love Superman and will flock to support him....until low quality drives them off. But they show up, every time, hoping to get what they and the character still deserve.

The feeling you get when Superman shows up and saves the day. NOthing compares. BTW, I saw a birthday card in a store saying this.

"This looks like a job for Superman!" There are things only Superman can do and mainstream audiences know and expect it.

[JAK]

I mean I can only speak for myself but I'll go with it as long as there are people who specifically cite Superman's overpowered status as a barrier to their enjoyment.

There are, but some of these same people have no problem with a character like Goku (just as an example). That's not to say that people can't have a distate for super-powered characters - they certainly can, and that's fine - but I find that this often has more to do with a social narrative than an actual preference. It's something that's seeped into the larger consciousness to the point that it's a "truism" that hasn't been explored. And part of that narrative has also become that "Batman can always beat Superman." And while I have no problem with people having a preference, the number of people who blindly state some of these things is a troubling indictment of DC's handling of both characters.

"Seriously" is always a difficult term to apply to silver age DC. That idea was much less prevalent in an era all about reusing plots yeah, but something they still tried. I did in fact snatch up WFC 143 today... to the best of my knowledge the first actual fight not just used to sell from the cover. An insecure Batman decks a depowered Superman, and then manages to beat the brakes off him in the ensuing duel when our guy decides not to kick his friend when he's down. Mostly what I've seen in reprints were just whether or not either was up to the task when put on an even keel, but the idea of competition was there.

True. I'm just saying that it wasn't something that came up directly as often as a vs Lex fight (which would weight the percentage comparison), or as often as it seemed to once the Post-Crisis framework came into the picture (and Superman is depowered in that example, that outcome makes more sense). Speaking generally (since I mentioned PCOIE) I don't mind the PCOIE framework as a starting point, but that it hasn't moved on fully from there is odd.

But what I mention is why I take issue with the anti post crisis sentiment that pops up. "Oh he's a rustic doormat." Bronze age writers like Maggin were the ones who suggested that Batman was the proportionately superior hero and have you ever seen satellite era Superman pull rank?

Thanks for sharing that! I haven't seen it often (been a while since I've read those), but there are a number of stories where Bronze Age Superman is fairly self-important at times (even if well-meaning, overall) and at least one story where he wrestles with the idea of "maybe this is a problem for me." I think today we'd call it a serious case of #kryptonianprivilege

[Kuwagaton]

Yeah there are times where he actually is beaten and he's like "Agh! but...I'm Superman! Oof" often he was a good sport about it but it usually only impressed him because he was impressive to himself.

Oh and far as the Lex fights you and Ascended mentioned, I dunno, Lex beats Superman up every once in a while. I guess always under kryptonite or something limiting, but Lex doesn't play those games.

Superman's advantage though is understanding his privilege well. I love that by the way, because that's totally what it is. But the heartbreak Bruce had from getting gut kicked to oblivion (karma for what happened to Hulk I guess) by the Bronze Tiger, or from the loss to Bane before they even knew his back was broken come from believing that he made himself and that the work he's put in makes him great.

I wanted hunt down that scene, where Tim is not sure why Bruce is so defeated. Mostly I see this thread as a service to highlight the late greats Aparo and Breyfogle, since they would never come up in the Superman board otherwise.

[JAK]

Yeah there are times where he actually is beaten and he's like "Agh! but...I'm Superman! Oof" often he was a good sport about it but it usually only impressed him because he was impressive to himself.

Oh and far as the Lex fights you and Ascended mentioned, I dunno, Lex beats Superman up every once in a while. I guess always under kryptonite or something limiting, but Lex doesn't play those games.

Yeah, there's always kryptonite involved, iirc - usually a crap ton of it. lol

Superman's advantage though is understanding his privilege well. I love that by the way, because that's totally what it is. But the heartbreak Bruce had from getting gut kicked to oblivion (karma for what happened to Hulk I guess) by the Bronze Tiger, or from the loss to Bane before they even knew his back was broken come from believing that he made himself and that the work he's put in makes him great.

I wanted hunt down that scene, where Tim is not sure why Bruce is so defeated. Mostly I see this thread as a service to highlight the late greats Aparo and Breyfogle, since they would never come up in the Superman board otherwise.

I've always liked Bruce portrayed as more human in the power sense, too - it's what makes B:TAS so good.

And very true - they definitely wouldn't be an instant "go-to" thought on here.

[Ascended]

There are, but some of these same people have no problem with a character like Goku (just as an example). That's not to say that people can't have a distate for super-powered characters - they certainly can, and that's fine - but I find that this often has more to do with a social narrative than an actual preference. It's something that's seeped into the larger consciousness to the point that it's a "truism" that hasn't been explored. And part of that narrative has also become that "Batman can always beat Superman." And while I have no problem with people having a preference, the number of people who blindly state some of these things is a troubling indictment of DC's handling of both characters.

I think this must be a shadow of the Silver Age still hanging over the character in the public consciousness. Somehow the image of Clark sneezing out galaxies and pulling entire solar systems and being totally unbeatable unless you've got a dues ex machina in hand.....all that seems to still be how a lot of people perceive the character. Even though that hasn't been the case in generations (if we can truly say it was ever the case at all, even back in the day Clark would get into a decent fist fight occasionally).

In my experience, most of the people who say things like this have never seen Superman in anything except, maybe, the Donner films or the occasional episode of a tv show. Maybe some JLA comics, if they're a comic fan. Rarely have they seen a story or adaptation that actually captured the character. They really have no clue who Superman really is, have no idea how impossibly wrong their preconceived notions are, but try to shake their conviction here and you might as well be telling them their god isn't real. Paradoxically they take it real damn personally. And these are also often the people who will claim that their personal favorite (Goku, Batman, who the hell ever, Wolverine!) could beat Clark. And when you try to point out the hypocrisy of this....that's probably the end of the conversation (but maybe the start of an argument).

[JAK]

I think this must be a shadow of the Silver Age still hanging over the character in the public consciousness. Somehow the image of Clark sneezing out galaxies and pulling entire solar systems and being totally unbeatable unless you've got a dues ex machina in hand.....all that seems to still be how a lot of people perceive the character. Even though that hasn't been the case in generations (if we can truly say it was ever the case at all, even back in the day Clark would get into a decent fist fight occasionally).

In my experience, most of the people who say things like this have never seen Superman in anything except, maybe, the Donner films or the occasional episode of a tv show. Maybe some JLA comics, if they're a comic fan. Rarely have they seen a story or adaptation that actually captured the character. They really have no clue who Superman really is, have no idea how impossibly wrong their preconceived notions are, but try to shake their conviction here and you might as well be telling them their god isn't real. Paradoxically they take it real damn personally. And these are also often the people who will claim that their personal favorite (Goku, Batman, who the hell ever, Wolverine!) could beat Clark. And when you try to point out the hypocrisy of this....that's probably the end of the conversation (but maybe the start of an argument).

Yep. I can't tell you how many of those converguments I've had with lamen idiots - thus informing my thoughts on the subject. "Superman is overpowered and suxors, but Batman can beat him every time".... what?

The overpowered part might be a holdover from the Silver Age, but given how many powerful characters are embraced wholesale, I think it's on DC that they haven't long-since flipped that on it's head.

[Desmark]

Aah you are just jealous that the big boy scout loser(I jest HEH HEH) hasn't got his own day. Lol but then again as Aaron said Thor had a day dedicated to him much before Batman came along so he has got both beaten in this department.

[Agent Z]

I think this must be a shadow of the Silver Age still hanging over the character in the public consciousness. Somehow the image of Clark sneezing out galaxies and pulling entire solar systems and being totally unbeatable unless you've got a dues ex machina in hand.....all that seems to still be how a lot of people perceive the character. Even though that hasn't been the case in generations (if we can truly say it was ever the case at all, even back in the day Clark would get into a decent fist fight occasionally).

In my experience, most of the people who say things like this have never seen Superman in anything except, maybe, the Donner films or the occasional episode of a tv show. Maybe some JLA comics, if they're a comic fan. Rarely have they seen a story or adaptation that actually captured the character. They really have no clue who Superman really is, have no idea how impossibly wrong their preconceived notions are, but try to shake their conviction here and you might as well be telling them their god isn't real. Paradoxically they take it real damn personally. And these are also often the people who will claim that their personal favorite (Goku, Batman, who the hell ever, Wolverine!) could beat Clark. And when you try to point out the hypocrisy of this....that's probably the end of the conversation (but maybe the start of an argument).

Well, the Superman fandom complaining about him being "nerfed" because his powers are depicted as being a bit more manageable probably doesn't help either. I remember a number of these complaints showing up when discussing the climax of MoS. Even Morrison got in on it.

[Ascended]

The overpowered part might be a holdover from the Silver Age, but given how many powerful characters are embraced wholesale, I think it's on DC that they haven't long-since flipped that on it's head.

Near as I can tell, almost everything about Clark's fall from prominence is due to DC's mismanagement. They've had opportunity and opportunity and dropped the ball time and again. There *is* the question of how 80's and 90's pop culture would have responded to a well done Superman though. We're the generation that burned down the stage at our Woodstock, we're the ones behind grunge and a lot of other rough and tumble stuff, so Clark's popularity might very well have taken a few knocks anyway, given the perception that had built up around him by then. But being a stage burning, Nirvana loving Gen X'er, I can safely say that in our own weird way we were idealistic as hell. Clark might've been okay if he had bent with the times a little (not saying "Great Scott!" in 1995 would've been nice). But DC just really failed to capitalize on.....almost anything.

Aah you are just jealous that the big boy scout loser(I jest HEH HEH) hasn't got his own day. Lol but then again as Aaron said Thor had a day dedicated to him much before Batman came along so he has got both beaten in this department.

Eh, Batman Day is like International Donut Day. No one knows, and no one cares.

Well, the Superman fandom complaining about him being "nerfed" because his powers are depicted as being a bit more manageable probably doesn't help either. I remember a number of these complaints showing up when discussing the climax of MoS. Even Morrison got in on it.

No, I dont think fans had much of an impact on this "too powerful" fallacy of a social construct. For one thing, it appears to have been in place well before the 86 reboot when Clark got nerfed, so this isn't something the fans would've been bitching about. We'd have complained about inconsistent power levels perhaps, but not stuff like the actual de-powering we got post-Crisis. Mostly though, I don't think the opinion of comic fandom registers with the general public, especially in pre-Internet decades. It does now more than it used to because of the films, but we are an extreme minority and most people do not care about the source material like we do. And back in the day? Our voice wasn't heard by the general public enough to really influence social opinion.

We're guilty of a lot, but not this, I think.

[Lukmendes]

I think this must be a shadow of the Silver Age still hanging over the character in the public consciousness. Somehow the image of Clark sneezing out galaxies and pulling entire solar systems and being totally unbeatable unless you've got a dues ex machina in hand.....all that seems to still be how a lot of people perceive the character. Even though that hasn't been the case in generations (if we can truly say it was ever the case at all, even back in the day Clark would get into a decent fist fight occasionally).

And even then you're taking Silver age out of context when claiming this, sure, Supes hardly ever got hurt outside of Kryptonite, but you wouldn't notice it that much, since his stories were about using his powers creatively, outsmarting everyone and whatever, how powerful he was generaly mattered little since the focus was his convoluted plans.

But then again, there's a lot of misconception around, such as Supes pulling new powers whenever he needed in silver age, but in truth that hardly ever happened, even the infamous super weaving is just him (Or in that case, an identical looking guy from Kandor) using his super speed creatively lol.

In my experience, most of the people who say things like this have never seen Superman in anything except, maybe, the Donner films or the occasional episode of a tv show. Maybe some JLA comics, if they're a comic fan. Rarely have they seen a story or adaptation that actually captured the character. They really have no clue who Superman really is, have no idea how impossibly wrong their preconceived notions are, but try to shake their conviction here and you might as well be telling them their god isn't real. Paradoxically they take it real damn personally. And these are also often the people who will claim that their personal favorite (Goku, Batman, who the hell ever, Wolverine!) could beat Clark. And when you try to point out the hypocrisy of this....that's probably the end of the conversation (but maybe the start of an argument).

The idea people have of Supes is that he's invincible, as in, never gets hurt and easily wins fights, and is "boring" for being a boy scout, and then we have people who take this so far they think he's a coward who'd never fight someone stronger than him... While someone like Goku, even if he's overpowered, he still gets beaten in fights, it's wrong of course, but too many people never bother to actualy check out something, which is more understandable if you're not interested in comic books or super heroes in general, but being stubborn about it, yeah, better not do that lol.

As for why Batman and Wolverine being super awesome is more acceptable, Batman it's because there's this idea that he's being super smart and cool, Wolverine it's because they like his anti-hero traits and overlook the rest, but yeah, still hipocrisy lol.

[JAK]

Aah you are just jealous that the big boy scout loser(I jest HEH HEH) hasn't got his own day. Lol but then again as Aaron said Thor had a day dedicated to him much before Batman came along so he has got both beaten in this department.

Eh, Batman Day is like International Donut Day. No one knows, and no one cares.

This, but Superman has not only a day but a whole weekend - and a town dedicated to him. And all of DC's bat-fetishization hasn't given him an equivalent to that. So I'm good.

spoilers:

I will say that DC's been "working" that corner of Crime Alley for so long that Batman's starting to chafe, but that's just me being a concerned citizen.

end of spoilers

Near as I can tell, almost everything about Clark's fall from prominence is due to DC's mismanagement. They've had opportunity and opportunity and dropped the ball time and again. There *is* the question of how 80's and 90's pop culture would have responded to a well done Superman though. We're the generation that burned down the stage at our Woodstock, we're the ones behind grunge and a lot of other rough and tumble stuff, so Clark's popularity might very well have taken a few knocks anyway, given the perception that had built up around him by then. But being a stage burning, Nirvana loving Gen X'er, I can safely say that in our own weird way we were idealistic as hell. Clark might've been okay if he had bent with the times a little (not saying "Great Scott!" in 1995 would've been nice). But DC just really failed to capitalize on.....almost anything.

True. I do think he would have had a hard time in the 80's/90's regardless, but as you and I have both said a lot, that depends on metric. Superman did great at the newsstands - it was the dedicated comics crowd that was busy looking at "EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" and lapping it up as a marketing experience. I enjoyed some of that myself (I was born in '80), but when it came to comics, I only cared enough about Superman to buy his titles/merch/etc.

As that all started to die down, Superman should have seen a revised heyday, but DC/WB is usually about a decade behind on where they need to be, so we got what we got. lol

No, I dont think fans had much of an impact on this "too powerful" fallacy of a social construct. For one thing, it appears to have been in place well before the 86 reboot when Clark got nerfed, so this isn't something the fans would've been bitching about. We'd have complained about inconsistent power levels perhaps, but not stuff like the actual de-powering we got post-Crisis. Mostly though, I don't think the opinion of comic fandom registers with the general public, especially in pre-Internet decades. It does now more than it used to because of the films, but we are an extreme minority and most people do not care about the source material like we do. And back in the day? Our voice wasn't heard by the general public enough to really influence social opinion.

We're guilty of a lot, but not this, I think.

Yeah - back then, nobody cared about "us nerds" enough to register our opinions. lol

And even then you're taking Silver age out of context when claiming this, sure, Supes hardly ever got hurt outside of Kryptonite, but you wouldn't notice it that much, since his stories were about using his powers creatively, outsmarting everyone and whatever, how powerful he was generaly mattered little since the focus was his convoluted plans.

But then again, there's a lot of misconception around, such as Supes pulling new powers whenever he needed in silver age, but in truth that hardly ever happened, even the infamous super weaving is just him (Or in that case, an identical looking guy from Kandor) using his super speed creatively lol.

The idea people have of Supes is that he's invincible, as in, never gets hurt and easily wins fights, and is "boring" for being a boy scout, and then we have people who take this so far they think he's a coward who'd never fight someone stronger than him... While someone like Goku, even if he's overpowered, he still gets beaten in fights, it's wrong of course, but too many people never bother to actualy check out something, which is more understandable if you're not interested in comic books or super heroes in general, but being stubborn about it, yeah, better not do that lol.

As for why Batman and Wolverine being super awesome is more acceptable, Batman it's because there's this idea that he's being super smart and cool, Wolverine it's because they like his anti-hero traits and overlook the rest, but yeah, still hipocrisy lol.

If I have it correctly, he's saying more that the perception started back then, not necessarily that it had any real comic-related basis. So our respective lines of thinking are fairly parallel, just stated differently.

[The True Detective]

Near as I can tell, almost everything about Clark's fall from prominence is due to DC's mismanagement. They've had opportunity and opportunity and dropped the ball time and again. There *is* the question of how 80's and 90's pop culture would have responded to a well done Superman though. We're the generation that burned down the stage at our Woodstock, we're the ones behind grunge and a lot of other rough and tumble stuff, so Clark's popularity might very well have taken a few knocks anyway, given the perception that had built up around him by then. But being a stage burning, Nirvana loving Gen X'er, I can safely say that in our own weird way we were idealistic as hell. Clark might've been okay if he had bent with the times a little (not saying "Great Scott!" in 1995 would've been nice). But DC just really failed to capitalize on.....almost anything.



Eh, Batman Day is like International Donut Day. No one knows, and no one cares.



No, I dont think fans had much of an impact on this "too powerful" fallacy of a social construct. For one thing, it appears to have been in place well before the 86 reboot when Clark got nerfed, so this isn't something the fans would've been bitching about. We'd have complained about inconsistent power levels perhaps, but not stuff like the actual de-powering we got post-Crisis. Mostly though, I don't think the opinion of comic fandom registers with the general public, especially in pre-Internet decades. It does now more than it used to because of the films, but we are an extreme minority and most people do not care about the source material like we do. And back in the day? Our voice wasn't heard by the general public enough to really influence social opinion.

We're guilty of a lot, but not this, I think.

#BatmanDay was the #1 trend in the U.S. for hours on Saturday, even more impressive considering College football games were happening too, and we (well, we Americans atleast) know how popular college football is. So I don't know if no one knows or cares about the day.

On the subject of people liking Goku vs them not liking Superman despite them both being very powerful, it might seem hypocritical, but imo it's not. I think the difference is that Goku has to work hard and train to maintain his level of power. We've seen in DBZ when characters stop training (Gohan and Krillin) they get weaker. So to the average person, Goku may be OP, but at least he has to constantly train really hard to stay at that level.

Also Goku is usually at first weaker than the villain, and must work his way up to their level, reach new forms (Kaioken, Super Sayian, Ultra Instinct, etc.) in hopes to beat them. Wheras Superman is only strong because of his exposure to the sun. Goku's need to get stronger through intense battle (a lot of the times nearly dying) and near constant, rigorous training makes his OP abilities seem more well earned to a lot of people. Same thing with Bruce, people might think he's OP and call him Batgod and that may be true at times. But he has to train, and study to get those Batgod skills, he doesn't just have them.