Does Batman frustrate you?

[Jon Clark]

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.

I'd agree if Batman's skills were actually earned. But when the idea is that Batman can outbox a guy who trains only as a boxer, outmaneuver a chessmaster who focuses only on that game, and is a master at a dozen other skills most people specialize in by a lifetime's training the argument falls flat. Batman gets all the bonuses you can get, none of the drawbacks those bonuses usually entail.

[manwhohaseverything]

#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.

Goku isn't rock lee. His strength is also thanks to his heritage. Otherwise, tien, piccolo.. Etc have been training their entire lives. They are still left in the dust.goku learned kamehameha in minutes compared to roshi who made it in 70 years or so. And vegeta trains harder than goku. But still goku gets the damn zenkai boosts and now ultra instinct. He is now even leaving guys like hit behind. They basically train hard as well.

As for sunlight thing. I agree. That's why i like the old goldenage explanation for superman's powers. Because it gives superman a chance to develop on his own rather than have sun "supplements" .

[The True Detective]

I'd agree if Batman's skills were actually earned. But when the idea is that Batman can outbox a guy who trains only as a boxer, outmaneuver a chessmaster who focuses only on that game, and is a master at a dozen other skills most people specialize in by a lifetime's training the argument falls flat. Batman gets all the bonuses you can get, none of the drawbacks those bonuses usually entail.

I never said anything about him being better than people who specialize in specific fields. Even if he was better than people who specialized in a specific field he still had to devote time to study and master it, even if it wasn't as much as others. Superman literally has superpowers because he's Kryptonian. Superman's faster than an Olympic sprinter despite the fact he devoted none of his time trying to get faster. In his case, Batman may not have spent as much time as the Olympic sprinter working in speed, but he had to devote SOME time to it. He didn't just wake up and have his skills.

[manwhohaseverything]

I never said anything about him being better than people who specialize in specific fields. Even if he was better than people who specialized in a specific field he still had to devote time to study and master it, even if it wasn't as much as others. Superman literally has superpowers because he's Kryptonian. Superman's faster than an Olympic sprinter despite the fact he devoted none of his time trying to get faster. In his case, Batman may not have spent as much time as the Olympic sprinter working in speed, but he had to devote SOME time to it. He didn't just wake up and have his skills.

That's like blaming a bird for flying or a fish for swimming. Tell you what? Superman can't outrun a kryptonIan sprinter with out training. And superman had adapt to earth(mos did a great job with it) . He had to control his powers. Birds competing with birds in flight is competion and Its fare. Complaining why a fox can't fly as birds is pointless.
You are comparing two different species. One that had to evolve in a million times harsher environment than us. Clark was born in that environment. Debt for clarks strength was paid by the kryptonIans as a species with their ability to survive, production of an advanced society and even death.

[DochaDocha]

If you're going to focus on the idea that Batman is "just a man," then I want there to be some palpable, real limits on what he can do. If you look at the comic history of Batman, he's pretty much reached the pinnacle of everything that humanity has accomplished, and I'm sorry, that doesn't fall within the realm of "just a man." Captain America perhaps can do it, but that's because he was genetically engineered to be that way. Maybe if you changed Batman's origin to being some part Frankenstein experiment, to some part mythological creature, to some part alien/god or whatever, I could accept it. But I don't care for the narrative of being "just a man" and then making him physically and statistically impossible for "just a man" to reproduce. You just can't be the best at everything. I know the stories try to reconcile this with the idea of training, but unless you're like Vandal Savage old, you don't have enough lifespan to train for everything, while keeping your mind and body "young" enough to handle the rigors. I get that some people like that, but I don't.

I don't need Batman to be realistic, but with the "just a man" qualifier, he needs to have some serious boundaries. I think the Arkham games nail this pretty well. Should one man be able to beat one hundred thugs? Probably not, but there's just enough atmosphere in the game in which it feels almost plausible while also being entertaining as hell. Plus, Batman kind of cheats, too, in the sense that he has some armaments to help him. However, the games do a good job of addressing the limitations by making it so that arming the bad guys with guns means Batman has to fight far more strategically. You try to fight guys with automatics by standing your ground, you're going to die in short order. The cartoons and comics aren't as good as the video games generally are in portraying this, where sometimes you see the gunmen shoot aimlessly while Batman just runs around and trolls the heck out of these incompetent goons.

I have this old joke with my friend about the Tortoise and the Hare, except in my version the Hare is smarter, stronger, and works harder than the Tortoise. Long story short, in some cases, the Tortoise just can't win. I think when writers pit Batman with or against other heroes, there's a Tortoise/Hare-like analogy to be made, so that the advantage whatever other hero has over Batman is always balanced (or overcome) by Batman's intellect and will, or the other hero's failings. That's just annoying after a while, if not from the get-go. There are going to be areas where Batman exceeds his fellow heroes, but think about this for a moment: what really has to happen for a tortoise to beat a hare in a footrace to the finish line? The hare dies? Runs backwards? Basically, something really stupid has to happen for the hare to lose. I mean, like mind-numbingly stupid.

I was thinking about that Death Battle video from years ago when Batman fought Spider-man, and I saw a lot of fans thought the outcome was wrong (spoiler: Spider-man won). It's like fans don't consider that Spider-man would kill Batman with one well-placed punch to the face, just one, and it might not even have to be that well-placed or forceful. Batman could probably be spotted 10 punches to Spidey's face, and Spidey might be able to shake it off, but flip the tables and Spider-man has to wash his costume off with Batman's guts. Now you could say that Batman has a martial arts advantage and all that, but martial arts only work that way in scripted fiction (see my earlier comment about "mind-numbingly stupid"). Some writers and fans would tell you that a puncher never has a chance against Batman, even an inhumanly strong, durable, and fast puncher.

I'm of the opinion that if you write Batman with the right combination of skills and limitations, he's the best superhero: you can make him appeal even to people who normally don't like superheroes, as well as the ones who are totally into them. But if you make him too weak, he's a joke, and if you make him too good then he's another type of joke altogether.

[Vordan]

I don’t hate Batgod. It’s his fanbase I can’t stand .

In all seriousness he’s probably my second or third favorite character. But Jesus does the way his fanboys write him make him unbearable. A condescending dick who is always right and is constantly talking down to everyone while being shilled as “humanity's Representative among the gods” is just insufferable as a characterization. Thankfully that’s been toned down in the comics but in outside media he’s really annoying. I’m also salty that no one seems to want to make ANY other DC superhero the star of a video game. Frankly that’s starting to piss me off.

[Ascended]

RE: Clark's training (or lack thereof).

It's true that this is a common misconception among the general public, and given that the larger media stuff almost never deals with it I understand why. But as with most things Super-related, the belief is wrong. Clark *does* train. He learned how to box, he studied martial arts in the 31st century with Karate Kid (the greatest fighter in history by the age of 16), he trains with the League, he's even trained with some villains like Mongul and (I believe) Maxima. He's familiar with a lot of martial arts from earth as well as fighting styles from different alien cultures, including an ancient form of Kryptonian martial art that was quasi-psychic. Make him human, and he's a pretty competent fighter (and we see this in the comics when he's de-powered; dude can brawl). Not on the level of a Batman or a Shiva but definitely well above most people. Like they said in Identity Crisis, the first thing the League teaches you is how to fight. Clark's far from the best fighter in the League but it's not like the guy doesn't know how to throw a punch.

But this is rarely ever given a ton of spotlight, and with fairly good reason. Clark trains....but his training is usually more about how to use his ability and power correctly, not how to beat people up. Imagine the amount of self-control it takes him just to walk down a street. If he sighs too loudly he'll blow a car off the road. If he lets someone bump into him on the sidewalk they're shoulder is broken. The sheer amount of physical restraint and care he has to have, even in things we consider subconscious/involuntary, is incredible. Clark's gotta have a handle on all of that, all the time. Even when he's asleep. And the sheer amount of sensory input he has to sort through at any given moment requires training and effort too. As someone said, the MoS film touched on that in the school scene where Clark can't get his senses under control and everything looks like a horror movie to him.

Clark's version of training normally isn't about combat (though there is that too). It's about how to process all the information he takes in and how to make his body do what he wants without destroying everything around him. I said earlier, I think in this thread maybe another one, that one of the core themes in Superman is "restraint." This is a part of that. Clark has to hold back far more than almost anyone; when you can do anything it's the things you *dont* do that matter, and we can clearly see this in the things Clark practices and trains in.

There's also the fact that Clark's mission is less about stopping criminals and more about saving lives. He's more of a first responder/fire fighter than he is a soldier or cop. Yes, he stops crime and fights super villains, and he does that a lot, but his main goal is to save lives. Thematically, if you pull all the fantastical and sci-fi out of him, he ends up looking like a fire fighter far more than a police officer. So even though he has to punch the Atomic Skull in the face every few weeks, his main drive isn't punishing the guilty (like Batman) but saving the innocent.

But the general public have no clue. They just think Clark walks through life completely uncontested and unchallenged. Even though villains who're physical threats like Zod are fairly well known. So once again you have this bias, this cherry picking, where people ignore what's in front of them (or what can be found with a 5 second Google) in order to reinforce the opinion they already hold.

[Vordan]

It didn’t help that Cavill Supes didn’t have so much as a scratch on him when he and Zod were tossing each other through buildings. I personally would’ve given Supes and Zod some black eyes and bloody noses and scratches and bruises to show that Cavill Supes was actually getting wrecked. Not sure why Snyder chose to go down that road creatively, he’s certainly not shy about blood. Maybe to avoid an R-rating?

[manwhohaseverything]

It didn’t help that Cavill Supes didn’t have so much as a scratch on him when he and Zod were tossing each other through buildings. I personally would’ve given Supes and Zod some black eyes and bloody noses and scratches and bruises to show that Cavill Supes was actually getting wrecked. Not sure why Snyder chose to go down that road creatively, he’s certainly not shy about blood. Maybe to avoid an R-rating?

That would have conveyed clark wasn't doing well or in any control more. I mean, the sam raimi's spiderman had him beaten to pulp by goblin. I think the death of superman animated movie did that better. The complaints regarding the destruction would have gone significantly less.

[jetengine]

Batman always tends to walk away from Supermaaannnnn fights like its nothing. Thats insane. I want a few panels of him reflecting how he should be dead.

[Ascended]

It didn’t help that Cavill Supes didn’t have so much as a scratch on him when he and Zod were tossing each other through buildings. I personally would’ve given Supes and Zod some black eyes and bloody noses and scratches and bruises to show that Cavill Supes was actually getting wrecked. Not sure why Snyder chose to go down that road creatively, he’s certainly not shy about blood. Maybe to avoid an R-rating?

Completely agree. That confused me the first time I saw the movie, and confuses me to this day.

It seems such an obvious thing. You look at the choreography and you can tell that Clark's not in control of the situation, and these guys are supposed to be physically equal (and Zod's got more fight training). Of course they'd be beaten to a pulp! It'd have gone a long way towards making that scene gain more acceptance from viewers I think. Clark breaks Zod's neck and he looks like he just got out of the shower, he doesn't look like a guy who was desperate and at the end of his rope and out of options. But you mess him up with a lot of cuts, bruises, a broken bone or two? Suddenly people are going to get it. I think Cavill did a fine job with the scene but he's too pretty to totally sell it without some blood on him.

I think it would've made a world of difference in the movie.

Same goes for the earlier fight with Faora and Non.

But of course....in my mind, Superman should spend at least half of his movie nursing wounds taken during a fight. The guy's super tough, he's not *actually* invincible and his foes are either his physical match or even stronger. There's no reason the guy shouldn't be a pile of bruises at the end of the day.

[Kuwagaton]

Invulnerability is like his oldest power, tied with strength and speed. He doesn't take damage proportionately. I keep bringing up the Hulk thing vs Batman because it's absurd, but it still makes for a clear example of comic book logic. Unless you read the old New Mutants and saw super strong Bobby getting his butt wrecked vs Sam being invulnerable while blastin'. You can't really write a comic where Superman gets tossed around according to his weight or anything and try to maintain his tradiontal aura. If you bang him up today then it's less impressive when you do it tomorrow, dimishing returns.

Batman gets banged up but it does still bug me because you can't call him human if he gets concussed twice in back to back comics. He can't just like... swing the whole city on a piece of rope. Conway once had him compromised by a gunshot for two issues but that was the best it ever got.

Quickest and easiest I can say about Goku: he is extremely dumb and recklessly selfish as character traits and no one likes his stories without a hint of Toriyama involvement. He is not really the same.

[Fergus]

Sure, say the same thing to yourself when harley or another character becomes more popular and batman becomes her/his ***** we already started seeing the effect. Remember heroes in crisis.

You mean like in HIC?
Sadly @Gurz is right. Real World popularity has a lot to do with it. Not to mention that a lot of writers are Batman fanboys. I was a sit down with some Batman writers at Con from a couple of years and all the writers there [Miller, Morrison, Synder, Murphy and one other] said that the thing about Batman is that he never loses.
When that is the mindset [which is reflected in majority of batman fans] it becomes the normal no matter how little sense it makes against super powered opponents.

I don't blame Batman I blame writers. I blame DC for their Batman heavy investment model. They rely too much on batman to the detriment of of their other IP's. This is way you get such nonsense as WW, Comics most iconic female character being used a a plot device to service batman's romance at a time when her profile was at it's highest following a successful solo movie

[Ascended]

Invulnerability is like his oldest power, tied with strength and speed. He doesn't take damage proportionately. I keep bringing up the Hulk thing vs Batman because it's absurd, but it still makes for a clear example of comic book logic. Unless you read the old New Mutants and saw super strong Bobby getting his butt wrecked vs Sam being invulnerable while blastin'. You can't really write a comic where Superman gets tossed around according to his weight or anything and try to maintain his tradiontal aura. If you bang him up today then it's less impressive when you do it tomorrow, dimishing returns.

I think it's a more than fair trade, honestly.

But then, I dislike the notion that Clark is "invulnerable" as opposed to just "really, really damn tough." And I don't think most of the comics support the idea of him being truly invulnerable either, outside of a few certain eras. He got hurt by the nuke in DKR, Russian Zod broke his.....arm? Jaw? I forget. Clark gets hurt, and has gotten hurt through most of his history. Even Conduit messed him up pretty decently, and the number of times he's nearly been beaten to death are nearly uncountable. I'd just like to see that made a little more plain.

For me, it's not about the shock value of "Oh noes! The invincible Superman got a black eye!" it's about the fact that Clark is fighting people in his weight class (or in a class above him) and should therefore suffer injuries. It's just showing that he had a tough fight. Not shock value, just a dude who got into a rough dust up. What happens when the unstoppable object hits the immovable object? They both get broken bones.

I mean, Batman, Invincible, Thor, tons of characters who are both on par with Clark and weaker than him walk away from fights with visible injuries. All the time. It's not going to hurt Clark if he does either. I mean, it's going to hurt him, but it's not gonna hurt him, yknow?

[JAK]

I just want to say that I'm enjoying the responses in this thread so much. The level of geekery on display here is lovely; it's a joy to read.