Superman Voted as the Most Popular Superhero!

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

This was about comparison, right? Batman having references/iconic or is'nt even up for debate.

Not really. This was about the mere fact that they have inspired people around the world. And guess what? Batman has. This is purely a way for you to try to move the goalposts

Precisely the point, wearing black or running around in the dark is only commonality between batman and a ninja. If batman is a ninja so Is zorro. Regardless of how many martial arts he "knows".i would argue that treating the character like what he is more universal, a detective with combat skills.

Except again, Batman has studied and mastered ninjutsu as well as many other martial arts. That's an established part of his character. Why are you doubting that? Zorro, last time I checked, did not travel to East Asia to train with martial arts masters.

Also, Batman is treated as a detective with combat skills.

Actually superman becoming a samurai is very possible.Especially, if batman can become a ninja. You don't have to be strictly born into it to be one, from what i have read. Just need competence with a sword and loyalty to a master and mission. That's it. Regardless though it would be changing the concept of the Superman character.

Well, good thing Batman has actually trained in and seemingly perfected many martial arts because that means that he's not far off from a ninja. Superman, however, is way far off from being a samurai.

His backstory says he has knowledge of 137 martial arts. Mastering them is different. Masters are people devoted to something and has been focused on it.

According to quotes pulled directly from the comics, he's mastered them:

Well, according to the comic books "he is a master of all fighting arts" (Detective Comics #411) who "spent years perfecting every known fighting discipline." (The Ultimate Guide to the Justice League). The Ultimate Guide to Batman is even more specific, describing how "There are 127 major styles of combat. While abroad, Bruce learned them all, from Aikido to Yaw-Yan." And not only is Batman seemingly a master of every known martial art in the world, he is also apparently an expert in many esoteric fighting styles, the nature of which seem to be only known by the writers.

Only names changed. He was still an alien strongman as concept in red son...

But there's a lot more to the concept of Superman than "alien strongman" There's the fact of him being the farm boy from Kansas. There's also the fact of him being in a "love triangle" between Clark, Lois, and Superman. Superman: Red Son did away with both of those parts of the core concept of Superman.

Dude, its obvious that both Goku and Icon are adaptations of the Superman concept to appeal to audiences that the original might not captivate. That's painfully obvious. Again, does that mean that Superman himself doesn't have almost universal appeal? No. Of course not. However, it is indicative of how Superman sometimes needs to be adapted to fit all audiences. Again, nothing wrong with that.

That's precisely a problem. If batman ninja isn't about a ninja then it's wrong. It was marketed batman ninja,except ninjas were fodders and concept was nowhere touched upon. The could have used the name of the period instead or something else. I saw the movie. Its basically like karate kid, except no karate and kungfu.

Dude. This is just semantics. You are arguing the title of an anime movie that was chosen simply because it sounded cool.

Adapating a concept and changing it are two different things in my book.

Well, again, they didn't really change the Batman concept in Batman: Ninja.

Harry potter was a wizard. He was the one who escaped. The kid was born great, he just didn't have any idea about it. I said two sets of parents.

It was revealed later on that Harry wasn't really "special" so much as lucky. He escaped because his mother's magic protected him from Voldemort. Also, "two sets of parents" being the aunt and uncle who abused him?

Hercules had two sets of parents. He had a devouring mother in hera, father in zeus as one set . His mortal parents Amphitryon and Alcmene in an other set. Zeus and alcmene signify his nature. Amphitryon and hera his nurture...Hera is very much herc's mother. She acts as an antagonistic figure.

Dude. Do you even know the myth? Are you going off of the Disney movie? Alcmene was Heracles's biological and only mother. Zeus had an affair with her. Hera was not his mother and didn't even try to act like it. She tried to kill him as an infant by sending snakes after him. Last I checked, most mothers don't try to kill their kids. Hera is set up as the antagonist because she is the antagonist. She is not portrayed as any sort of motherly figure to him. But whatever, you'll probably try to argue otherwise just because...

Jason existing doesn't mean he is a universal hero. Jason isn't. He is just a hero that's it and doesn't follow the archetype. Perseus had two sets of parents , ditto a universal hero. Perseus was raised by fisherman named Dictys. He slayed medusa for pete's sake.

Again, do you not know the myth? Dictys was not Perseus's stepfather or father. He took in Perseus and his mother, but he didn't marry her. In fact, part of the myth is that Perseus wants to protect his mother from being seduced by Polydectus, Dictys's brother. So, again, Perseus was raised by a single mother who was taken in by a fisherman. That's very different from saying he has two sets of parents. It sounds more like he has one mother and a father figure and another hated figure in his life.

The set doesn't need to be complete(with a father and a mother archetype) nor does it have two be made of two characters of opposite sex or even the same species .it's basically bullet points what i wrote, ring any bells.for example, son of shiva and parvathy was raised by 6 women or sisters in hindu lore. Tarzan was raised by gorillas. Mowgli by wolves.there are countless examples like this in lores of other cultures around the world . There are even examples where two men birth children only to be raised by others. Jiraya was raised under the tutelage of toads and fought orochimaru-the snake for tsunade.

It just sounds more and more like you're trying to backtrack on what you said earlier by casting a wider net.

Either way, by your new definition, Batman would also qualify. After all, Bruce's original set of parents died in Crime Alley and after that, he was raised by his family butler, who has become the closest thing Bruce has to a father figure. So then, if the set doesn't need to be complete, then Alfred is Bruce's second "set" of parents.

Right, i might be totally an idiot for thinking all the talks of fighting monsters, madness, nihilism, existential struggle, madness and the abyss is not ubermensch at all. /s
Get outta here with that. Batman is the ubermensch. He is the answer to questions and ethical conundrums of a world where god is dead and the devil is very much real. The goal of mankind is batman. Superman doesn't fit the bill, right now.He is based entirely on the values of mythical and religious thought.

Straight from Wikipedia:

Zarathustra first announces the Übermensch as a goal humanity can set for itself. All human life would be given meaning by how it advanced a new generation of human beings. The aspiration of a woman would be to give birth to an Übermensch, for example; her relationships with men would be judged by this standard...some commentators associate the Übermensch with a program of eugenics. This is most pronounced when considered in the aspect of a goal that humanity sets for itself. The reduction of all psychology to physiology implies, to some, that human beings can be bred for cultural traits. This interpretation of Nietzsche's doctrine focuses more on the future of humanity than on a single cataclysmic individual....

...the Übermensch represents a higher biological type reached through artificial selection and at the same time is also an ideal for anyone who is creative and strong enough to master the whole spectrum of human potential,

So, yeah, that doesn't really sound like Batman. Bruce is not the product of eugenics or selective breeding. He's the example of a man who trained himself up. But either way, this is all beside the point.

Then why is batman is very little used by without dc company backing by independent authors

That's the thing: he is. You're just choosing to ignore the examples of his influence. I mean, there are actual novels and scholarly articles written about Batman. There are numerous characters, both in American pop culture and in pop culture around the world, who were inspired by Batman. Why you're choosing to ignore all of that is beyond me.

That's just your prejudice. Just because you see malice in something, doesn't mean it actually exists. I compared it, superman symbol and the cross with swastika because it is relevant and it's basically me comparing it to apple logo or google one. I can't use those cause, there are still people who have no idea about it.

Sure.

Batman require you to know the meaning of what a bat is in english. While super is word that's spread around and people have more familiarity with that word. People also have innate ideas of what a strongman is.

Uh, they couldn't recognize what bats are?

Bat-symbol would only mean blackblot or just a bat for many around the world.

Yeah. Just because you keep saying that doesn't make it true.

[manwhohaseverything]

You might be able to better argue that Superman's exploits disqualify him as a journalist. Batman has been explicitly trained in ninjutsu. In some sources, like the DK trilogy, it's arguably his only training. He's just as much of a detective, and more superhero than either of those given his skill set and the events of his operation, but "ninja" is and has been a prominent part of his appeal for at least 30 years now.



Superman's status quo is virtually impenetrable. No matter what you do, like make him a TV star for over a decade, people will remember that he's secretly the mild reporter. But we'll never stop having one offs like the Shogun of Steel




The poll is impressive because Batman is so uniquely good at morphing for demographics. When casuals would swear that the Adam West version was really him, the Bill Murray movie could have probably landed successfully and brought the comics back to the old "new look" stuff. I really don't doubt that the idea was valid even though the stars were all lined up for the darker post crisis Batman. Meanwhile the difference between Adventures of Reeves and the early 90s Superboy wasn't so big. Superman has been a specific composite for so long that I'd think people would get bored if it even appealed to them in the first place.

Even in dk trilogy, he fails the intiatiation and only got trained by them. Essentially, he fails as a ninja by failing his sencho's test. Therefore, he isn't one. Ninja's are clans, communities.. Etc you have to be excepted by them. Furthermore, they are mostly closed.Bruce was taken in because Ra's al ghul found him interesting(richboy in prison) and he was still an ametuer compared to ra's who was born into it. He was a special case. Ra's basically took bruce apart even with all the martial arts he "knows"(something i can relate to) . Even by the end, ra's still out classes him in pure skill. Which is precisely the point. Bruce just uses other things.Damian is a true ninja(the only one) , If and when league of shadows are a clan. He is also traitor, who defected from his community. If batman can be a ninja then superman can be an amazon. No at best, they can be honorary members.

As for superman, being a journalist. He isn't one and not nearly a ethical one. You could argue clumsy clark kent is. But, that guy doesn't exist in reality. He is used to regularly try to stop any news of "Superman" . It is a forgone conclusion that clark kent's job as a journalist is a farce. He might like writing, but he isn't a journalist.Atleast not an ethical one. Writers specifically wanted everyone to know that.

Superman can't be samurai regardless, because he never bows. It's a requirement to bow to be a samurai. I haven't seen superman valuing honor and loyalty like the 47 samurai/ronin.these guys were loyal to their master even after his death and them becoming ronins. They died for the honor of their master. Even as ronin, i don't know superman can a good one because of his code. Then again kenshin just flipped all of that with reverse blade sword.

That isn't impressive,if you ask me. It's basically feels like crutch. I wasn't talking about tonal changes or things like that. Adam west is basically same batman with goofier tone. For me a universal concepts are things that can be identified by anyone. Batman only works if he is treated as a detective. Let's say if he is turned to a ninja using the 137 martial arts explanation , would an indian or korean or even a Japanese be able to identify with him? I don't think so. Why? Story is basically saying i can be anything without much effort. No, i can't be chinese or british just by drinking tea(sorry if i offend anybody. I mean none of it) or doing tai chi. That's not how it works. Motifs being used like this has always been cheap for me. While, superman can be identifiable by any culture. let's say i create a character named jango the wrestler. He can be dropped into any society and he would work. Superman is like that. He can be russian, japanese, Indonesian .. Etc. Strongmen tradition around the world is the same. "Get stronger by doing the things that matter". I appreciate this universality more than the forced cultural adoption of motifs and symbols. These things means alot to the native culture. Using it so casually without thought is just bad way of going about things. Especially, if you are ignorant about things.

[manwhohaseverything]

truncated

I never batman has not. I always said superman has been used more. So where did move the goal post? You believing i said batman isn't referenced doesn't make it so.

truncated

Ok then, can i be amazon? I don't thinks. Can i be berserker? I don't thinks so. Can i be a black panther? Yeah! That ain't happening . His travels mean nothing. He would only have some knowledge or basics that's it.

No, he is treated as part of the culture with the 137 martial arts nonsense, when he is basically an outsider. But, treating him like an insider is different. The movie at the very least marketed it as such.

truncated

What are you talking about? Kendo is pretty easy (comparatively speaking). You can start training anytime and learn it to get to competence level . Superman can easily be a samurai. Provided, he let's his code go and swear his undieing loyalty to his master. If he brings dishonor he would kill himself.

Truncated

Dude, bruce basically uses standard forms of kicks and punches. I haven't seen much reference to other cultures. In the dark knight trilogy he tries to use the Chinese crane, panther, tiger.. Etc. It was poorly done. He basically sucked. Martial arts is basically dance. Like one punch man's conclusion, it's just moving your arms and legs in fancy ways. Of course, dances can be effective. But, each have different approaches, root of origin and different tones. I haven't seen bruce dance differently. He uses basic round houses, uppercuts, jabs, ground and pound. He is a fighter. I can't deny that. But, he isn't a master of any form. He is basically mma. That's not derogatory by the way. But, ninja is a clan or Military system. That's different from martial arts. There are other systems like that in other cultures. Batman can't be part of those.

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated.
[QUOTE/]

"Farm boy from kansas", love triangle aren't a concept. It's basically a storyline point. Him being farmer is a concept(which by the way is latest addition from donner movies). He was, is and always will be a strongman. Otherwise, he wouldn't be a wearing that suit. That's his very identity. Furthermore, you know who was the first to wear it?the phantom. Romance is a genre and writers can choose whether to have a particular story or plot point. Regardless, core concept is that of a strongman.

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated.
[QUOTE/]

Storypoints and concepts are two different things. Icon is a strongman. Goku isn't.Goku, icon aren't an adaptation of superman but inspired by him. That is totally different thing. It's like saying batman is an adaptation of zorro. We were talking concepts and not story points. Conceptually, goku and superman aren't the same. Superman is an alien strongman vigilante. Goku is an alien martial arts master.

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated
[QUOTE/]

Sounding cool isn't a good enough excuse. These motifs and symbols are part of a culture.If it didn't change, it had no business having the title ninja.

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated.
[QUOTE/]

Dude, there was this whole thing about the prophecy. His mothers magic protected him because of destiny. He was always meant as he is great. But, harry himself doesn't view himself like that. Hermoine basically understood that from the get go. Being great isn't just about power, it takes more than that. Harry basically setoff a python as a kid in park and used to do wierd things. See the motifs with snakes. Aunt and uncle were devouring father and mother doesn't mean disqualify them as a set. Heroes are those who are destined to slay the serpent. Serpents are symbolic for chaos. Shiva wears it around his kneck to signify he controls chaos. Spartacus was coiled by it in his sleep. Eve was tricked by it. Michael fought it


[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated.
[QUOTE/]

Dude, i know myths. I wasn't going by disney movie. Do you even know what a devouring mother is? Keyword devouring. Mothers or father or son who eat their kids or parents. Those are common in animal kingdom and is engraved in human consciousness . I am not being literal, here in this instance "eat" means killing for the wellbeing of oneself. Hera is heracles's stepmother aka his devouring mother. Amphitryon was heracles's step father. Him and hera both represent nature of heracles. While the other two, nurture.

Zeus himself had a devouring father.

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated
[QUOTE/]

He doesn't need to marry her. He took the role of his father archetype to signify his nurture and so did his wife clymene were the saviours. Here perseus is the one in question not his mother. Dictys marrying perseus's mother is inconsequential.Furthermore, polydectus is a devouring father archetype himself. Many of These old stories have fathers and son competing for mothers affection. I know that Freud was influenced by them.

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated
[QUOTE/]

No wider net. Two sets of parents are all i have said. One for nature and one for nurture. You just have preconceived notions of what that is based on your experience. I can write the story of superman with same results by superman being parented by Jonathan and martin instead for nurture side and on the nature he can be parented by lara and Jayna-el,To the same effect.In fact, there are legends similar to that.

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated.
[QUOTE/]

Alfred didn't raise him. He was a care taker. There is a difference. If he was bruce's father then batman wouldn't exist or bruce would be a different kind of batman. Batman needs the fall. He is the fallen one rising from the abyss. A father archetypes is always a preventing measure against that. Furthermore, it cements bruce's master morality. While clark kent has slave morality.

Master morality values pride and power, while slave morality values kindness, empathy, and sympathy. Master morality judges actions as good or bad (e.g. the classical virtues of the noble man versus the vices of the rabble), unlike slave morality, which judges by a scale of good or evil intentions (e. g. Christian virtues and vices, Kantian deontology).

Ofcourse, bruce and alfred love each other. But, is he his parent? I don't think so.Alfred doesn't influence bruce negatively or positively as a parental figure needs to. They love each other, but alfred isn't bruce parent.

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated.
[QUOTE/]

Yeah! Yeah! I know of the eugenics nonsense and how nazi's hijacked the concept. That still doesn't mean anything. Bruce wayne is quintessential ubermensch. The motifs in the story makes it abundantly perfect.

Furthermore,Nietzsche's philosophies were'nt based on racial concept and was more spiritual in nature. nazi's took swastika as well for their purposes. Most things can be perverted like that. The s can be as well.

Hitler's adaption of the "social-Darwinist" implications of the Ubermensch. Nietzsche died decades before the rise of the Nazi movement and his Beyond Good And Evil explicitly criticizes exactly the kinds of nationalism and anti-Semitism at that movement's heart, but his thinking, including that of the ubermensch, certainly were adopted into Nazi ideology.

Source:https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/engl...d_and_evil.htm

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated
[QUOTE/]

Again, this was always about comparison. And I am not. But, that doesn’t put him on the same level as superman who has no backing of that sort from parent company. That was my point.

[QUOTE=Zeeguy91;4898229]
Truncated.
[QUOTE/]

There are people who don't know english around the world. The word bat is a less familiar word compared to super.it is'nt me keeping saying, the former logic of it being a requirement to know superman to know what a superhero is, combined with the fact that it isn't for batman puts very much credence and combined with my travel experiences. It is very much evident that batman hasn't penetrated far enough compared to the man in red undies.we can agree to disagree.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

I never batman has not. I always said superman has been used more. So where did move the goal post? You believing i said batman isn't referenced doesn't make it so.

You're moving the goalpost with this stupid competition of who has inspired more anime characters when a) the point is that they both have and b) its very tangential and almost unrelated to the main point.

Ok then, can i be amazon? I don't thinks. Can i be berserker? I don't thinks so. Can i be a black panther? Yeah! That ain't happening . His travels mean nothing. He would only have some knowledge or basics that's it.

Again, Batman has trained in ninjutsu and has established himself a master martial artist. What you don't get about that, I don't understand.

What are you talking about? Kendo is pretty easy (comparatively speaking). You can start training anytime and learn it to get to competence level . Superman can easily be a samurai. Provided, he let's his code go and swear his undieing loyalty to his master. If he brings dishonor he would kill himself.

Except, again, Clark has never shown any interest in training in martial arts. Bruce not only has done so, but is established as a master of martial arts.

Dude, bruce basically uses standard forms of kicks and punches. I haven't seen much reference to other cultures. In the dark knight trilogy he tries to use the Chinese crane, panther, tiger.. Etc. It was poorly done. He basically sucked. Martial arts is basically dance. Like one punch man's conclusion, it's just moving your arms and legs in fancy ways. Of course, dances can be effective. But, each have different approaches, root of origin and different tones. I haven't seen bruce dance differently. He uses basic round houses, uppercuts, jabs, ground and pound. He is a fighter. I can't deny that. But, he isn't a master of any form. He is basically mma. That's not derogatory by the way. But, ninja is a clan or Military system. That's different from martial arts. There are other systems like that in other cultures. Batman can't be part of those.

Dude, again, the literal text of the books establishes Bruce as a master martial artist who has mastered many different forms of fighting. So you really have no argument here. If you have an issue with that, take it up with DC Comics. I wouldn't expect a response, though.

"Farm boy from kansas", love triangle aren't a concept. It's basically a storyline point. Him being farmer is a concept(which by the way is latest addition from donner movies). He was, is and always will be a strongman. Otherwise, he wouldn't be a wearing that suit. That's his very identity. Furthermore, you know who was the first to wear it?the phantom. Romance is a genre and writers can choose whether to have a particular story or plot point. Regardless, core concept is that of a strongman.

Being a farm boy from Kansas has been a part of Clark's identity from the get-go. That's a huge part of who he is. It's like saying Spider-Man isn't from Queens. I mean, have you read Superman comics??

Storypoints and concepts are two different things. Icon is a strongman. Goku isn't.Goku, icon aren't an adaptation of superman but inspired by him. That is totally different thing. It's like saying batman is an adaptation of zorro. We were talking concepts and not story points. Conceptually, goku and superman aren't the same. Superman is an alien strongman vigilante. Goku is an alien martial arts master.

Goku is an alien who was sent here as a baby after his home planet was detroyed and who fights on a regular basis to protect Earth and the human race. Sounds a lot like Superman to me. You even mentioned him as one of the characters inspired by Superman. However, Goku also represents a modification of the Superman story. He is infused with elements that Eastern Asian audiences would more traditionally associate with a hero and ties to Chinese and Japanese culture. In other words, he's basically Superman, but adapted for East Asian audiences. However, by your own logic, that would mean that there was a flaw in the Superman mythos. After all, if Superman has universal appeal, why would he need to be adapted in such a way?

Unless of course, we admit that adaptation is not a sign of weakness and, in fact, adapting to other audiences is a sign of Batman and Superman's universal appeal as characters...

Sounding cool isn't a good enough excuse. These motifs and symbols are part of a culture.If it didn't change, it had no business having the title ninja.

Again, it's a title. And it had no impact on the reception of the movie. If you have an issue, again, take it up with DC.

Dude, there was this whole thing about the prophecy. His mothers magic protected him because of destiny. He was always meant as he is great. But, harry himself doesn't view himself like that. Hermoine basically understood that from the get go. Being great isn't just about power, it takes more than that.

That's the point. Harry became great through hard work. He grew and changed and matured into a full fledged wizard. He wasn't born that way. Your criteria said that the hero had to be born great.

Dude, i know myths. I wasn't going by disney movie. Do you even know what a devouring mother is? Keyword devouring. Mothers or father or son who eat their kids or parents. Those are common in animal kingdom and is engraved in human consciousness . I am not being literal, here in this instance "eat" means killing for the wellbeing of oneself. Hera is heracles's stepmother aka his devouring mother. Amphitryon was heracles's step father. Him and hera both represent nature of heracles. While the other two, nurture.

Zeus himself had a devouring father.

He doesn't need to marry her. He took the role of his father archetype to signify his nurture and so did his wife clymene were the saviours. Here perseus is the one in question not his mother. Dictys marrying perseus's mother is inconsequential.Furthermore, polydectus is a devouring father archetype himself. Many of These old stories have fathers and son competing for mothers affection. I know that Freud was influenced by them.

Obviously, you don't. Because unlike Chronos, neither Hera nor Polydectus were in any sort of paternal/maternal or even caregiving position for Heracles or Perseus, respectively. Chronos was Zeus's actual father. Hera was not only not Heracles's mother, but hated the fact that he even existed and, again, tried to kill him as an infant by sending serpents after him and his actual mother. Perseus was basically raised by a single mother, with another male role model in his life, who happened to have a brother who actually serves as a main antagonist for Perseus. So, uh, both those cases sound a lot different from Superman's set up, with two pairs of loving parents.

No wider net. Two sets of parents are all i have said.

Yes. It is a wider net.

Alfred didn't raise him. He was a care taker. There is a difference. If he was bruce's father then batman wouldn't exist or bruce would be a different kind of batman. Batman needs the fall. He is the fallen one rising from the abyss. A father archetypes is always a preventing measure against that...

Ofcourse, bruce and alfred love each other. But, is he his parent? I don't think so.Alfred doesn't influence bruce negatively or positively as a parental figure needs to. They love each other, but alfred isn't bruce parent.

See, this is a perfect example of moving goalposts. Alfred:

- took care of Bruce since the time he was born
- was the sole guardian figure in his life since his parents' passing
- took him on trips around the world and saw to his well-being
- constantly worries about him while he's out as Batman and patches him up when he gets injured

If that's not a father figure, I don't know what is. Also, in what world would Hera qualify as a parental figure to Heracles but Alfred wouldn't qualify as one to Bruce??

Here's also an article entitled Batman's Father Figure, the subject of which is Alfred.

The Batman wiki further adds:

Alfred often acts as a father-figure to Bruce, and a grandfather to Dick, Jason, Tim and Cassandra.

And here's even a scene from a comic that drives the point home:



So, yeah, saying Alfred isn't a father figure to Bruce is ridiculous when he's cemented in canon as being such. Bruce literally celebrates him on Father's Day. Therefore, by your own criteria, Batman has two sets of parents, his deceased parents and his surrogate father, Alfred, and therefore fits the hero trope.

Yeah! Yeah! I know of the eugenics nonsense and how nazi's hijacked the concept. That still doesn't mean anything. Bruce wayne is quintessential ubermensch. The motifs in the story makes it abundantly perfect.

Well, again, I believe you're wrong but this is entirely unrelated to the point so I'm not going to bother with this rabbit hole.

But, that doesn’t put him on the same level as superman who has no backing of that sort from parent company. That was my point.

Dude. Get over it. Batman is popular with or without "DC's backing."

There are people who don't know english around the world.

Uh, they know what bats look like. They also know that there's a famous superhero who dresses like one.

[Kuwagaton]

Even in dk trilogy, he fails the intiatiation and only got trained by them. Essentially, he fails as a ninja by failing his sencho's test. Therefore, he isn't one. Ninja's are clans, communities.. Etc you have to be excepted by them. Furthermore, they are mostly closed.Bruce was taken in because Ra's al ghul found him interesting(richboy in prison) and he was still an ametuer compared to ra's who was born into it. He was a special case. Ra's basically took bruce apart even with all the martial arts he "knows"(something i can relate to) . Even by the end, ra's still out classes him in pure skill. Which is precisely the point. Bruce just uses other things.Damian is a true ninja(the only one) , If and when league of shadows are a clan. He is also traitor, who defected from his community. If batman can be a ninja then superman can be an amazon. No at best, they can be honorary members.

Here we're talking about popular opinion. In popular opinion there really isn't that sort of separation by distinction. Batman is frankly close enough when you consider that the most popular current "ninja" fiction has them in daycares, colleges, as female mayors, and listening to hip hop. On the other hand despite being one of the most popular fictional detectives, it's not like he resembles people with the actual job of detective either

As for superman, being a journalist. He isn't one and not nearly a ethical one. You could argue clumsy clark kent is. But, that guy doesn't exist in reality. He is used to regularly try to stop any news of "Superman" . It is a forgone conclusion that clark kent's job as a journalist is a farce. He might like writing, but he isn't a journalist.Atleast not an ethical one. Writers specifically wanted everyone to know that.

Clark is Superman, they're as "real" as one another. Superman is a journalist in that he graduated school in journalism and benefits from a personal career in journalism. Ethically he has a problem, but because it's not communicated by the writers as something that makes him a bad person I guess it's easily overlooked.

That isn't impressive,if you ask me. It's basically feels like crutch. I wasn't talking about tonal changes or things like that. Adam west is basically same batman with goofier tone. For me a universal concepts are things that can be identified by anyone. Batman only works if he is treated as a detective. Let's say if he is turned to a ninja using the 137 martial arts explanation , would an indian or korean or even a Japanese be able to identify with him? I don't think so. Why? Story is basically saying i can be anything without much effort. No, i can't be chinese or british just by drinking tea(sorry if i offend anybody. I mean none of it) or doing tai chi. That's not how it works. Motifs being used like this has always been cheap for me. While, superman can be identifiable by any culture. let's say i create a character named jango the wrestler. He can be dropped into any society and he would work. Superman is like that. He can be russian, japanese, Indonesian .. Etc. Strongmen tradition around the world is the same. "Get stronger by doing the things that matter". I appreciate this universality more than the forced cultural adoption of motifs and symbols. These things means alot to the native culture. Using it so casually without thought is just bad way of going about things. Especially, if you are ignorant about things.

Batman's different versions don't really require him to appropriate if that's what you mean. He can reach a Japanese audience as is and we get stuff like Batmanga. This poll is again surprising to me because I haven't seen Superman ported over like Batman and Spider-Man have been.

[DochaDocha]

It's not you, it's the children who are wrong!



Sorry, another Simpsons quote felt appropriate.

No need to apologize, haha. I posted a video of that scene in another thread not that long ago.

But really, there's nothing wrong with Superman. The issues are largely just in how DC has handled him and the fact that their mistreatment has gone on long enough to impact the larger media stuff. And sure, today's more cynical edged outlook isn't a environment where you'd expect Clark to thrive, but he's outlived grim and dark days before, and will again.

And at some point, DC will remember how to handle the character, and society will be reminded why he endures.

DC's writing hasn't been consistently great enough to keep Superman #1, but I think he's continually going to stay outside the top two as long as he doesn't have solo TV cartoons, his Hollywood movies are mediocre, and other characters will have better toy products.

Something I'd like to know is what's the age distribution of comic readers, year-by-year. Below is a chart with completely made-up numbers:

Fake Graph 1.png

I feel like the reality probably looked something along these lines when Superman was #1. These days, I feel like reality looks more like this:

Fake Graph 2.png

A lot of people cite as (anecdotal) evidence of why Spider-man and the X-Men were so popular is that they appealed to teens struggling with life for various reasons, feeling like outsiders or facing a lot of pressures, and that just doesn't seem to fit the Superman mold. I think angsty teenagers can relate to Batman's rage and frustration, and Bruce's psychological trauma. So if the quality of writing and art of a Superman comic and a Batman comic are roughly equal, you'd have to do some other promotional stuff to get Superman sales closer to Batman's just based on who buys comics.

[manwhohaseverything]

truncated.

No, i am not. This was always about comparison. Btw, i didn't just bring in anime characters. Furthermore, you basically brought two examples. That's less than nothing compared to superman. Who's copies keep getting made.

Training in ninjutsu wouldn't make you ninja. Just because i learned some music doesn't mean i am musician. There is a difference.

Clark's interests are upto the writers. Clark can learn taichi if some guy wanted to. That's besides the point.

Him being a martial artist wouldn't make him a ninja. A ninja system is based on clans, communities.. Etc. Sheesh! If bruce can't be an amazon neither can he become a ninja. These guys are born into these miltary complexes.

No, it hasn't. He used to live in suburbs. He wasn't a farmboy until postcrisis reboot and donner movies. Sheesh! Farmboy thing was later on addition.


moses, krishna.. Etc also have that similar plot points. Would that mean superman is an adaptation of moses or krishna? No. Storyline point and concepts are two different thing. These guys are prophets, demigods, gods, avatars.. Etc. superman is conceptually an alien. Dude! The intention of akira toriyama wasn't to adapt superman(as if goku is a superman adaptation. Having same plot point doesn't mean it's an adaptation. It only mean they have same archetype ) . Superman was nowhere in his mind originally. Sun wukong was. Saiyan thing was a later on introduced. Superman can as a concept be adapted into a movie without much change because conceptually, he is an alien strongman vigilante. Those are universal concepts. People would be able to identify with him regardless of whether you are an iranian or american.if superman needs to become an alien martial artist with bushido values. Then guess what? His entire concept changes.my complaint regarding the batman marketing and title "ninja" is this, precisely . This kinda thing does mean the character needs to be changed to fit into a culture and that in my opinion is bad. But, superman doesn't need to. Which has always been my stance as a strongman, he is universal. Goku was designed to be a separate character.He wasn't meant to be seen as japanese superman or superman 2.0. So saying goku is an adaptation of superman is preposterous statement. Goku has taken inspirations from superman just like sunwukong.Goku isn't an adaptation of sun wukong either.

Dude, the guy could talk to snakes thanks to voldemort. he was connected to voldermort. his Petronas charm was of the charts for a rookie. hermoine works hard too. She wasn't the chosen one nor did she perform the feats harry did.just look at the wand choosing ceremony. Oliwander says "we can expect great things from you too".And he did. The kid always had the potential. He was great by nature and focused by nurture. Superman is the same. He is great by nature and focused by nurture. He would have gone slytherine. But he chooses not to. Ring any bells! Superman chooses to be superman and not a gun. Harry and clark are very much a universal hero archetype based characters. Ergo glorified clichés that keeps repeating itself.

They don't need to. It's the subtext. Hera is the reason hercules performs the twelve labours. She spur him into action as an antagonistic mother figure. Hercules wouldn't be a hero without hera. He even marries her daughter after his ascension further cementing the mother connection . Polydectus situation is similar interms of influence. They both affect the protagonist negatively, while developing or pushing them into the heroes they need to become. They are both the inverses of father and mother for respective heroes. Both of them belong to the nurture set. Hera driving hercules into madness mean his nurture(environment) drove him into madness. But hercules has innate good in so redeemed himself with labour and becomes the a legend.

It isn't a wider net. Two sets.a Set can contain any number of elements or types. provided it satisfies a condition or a number of conditions. Here, the conditions are simple. Does the kid have two groups of parents which signify nature and nurture? That's it. Furthermore, they need to be parents/relatives not caretakers. To quote itachi,
"I am always going to be there for you, even if it is only as an obstacle for you to overcome, you and I have to live together, even if it means hating each other, that...is what big brothers are for..."

Again, have i said alfred doesn't love bruce? No. Those thing doesn't make you a father or mother archetype. Alfred doesn't influence bruce's decisions. We don't see much of alfred in bruce so to speak. Which is precisely why hera and polydectus take those roles and alfred doesn't.Alfred didn't raise him.He took care of him. Let's see how should i explain? I will give you my example, i was taken care of a couple of other people , my grandmother and grandfather when i was taken away from them. But, they didn't become my other set of parents. They were just caretakers. They loved me but they didn't influence me negatively or positively . My real parents came only later. Superman was taken in and was taken care of by an orphanage,too.His real parents only came later. In my case, my nurture - my aunt and uncle,my nature- my biological father and mother. And in my case, the my biological parents were devouring archetypes. They were "eating" me alive for awhile . All of the following people affected me and influence me. One set positively and one set negatively.Alfred is written in a way that he doesn't affect bruce. You might argue in the Darkknight triology he is written to do affect bruce. But that is a different take, not the norm. In that movie, alfred is able to reorient bruce so that he can be an upstanding citizen of the society. Otherwise, alfred is sassy servant who passes sarcastic comments about his master, mostly.

How is that me moving goal post? You said alfred is bruce's parent on the nurture side. I disagree. I am providing my reasons to believe that. no positive parent will allow a child to choose Vigilantism. Either, alfred is a bad influence or he isn't much of an influence. I have seen alfred being more of a parent with damian,Never with bruce. With damian, alfred behaves differently. He isn't just a caretaker, but a little bit like a dotting mother. Tomasi basically set him up as opposite to lois. That image with bruce and alfred only shows their love and care for each other. I have never denied the affection . To take the role of the parent is different. Bruce is specifically written to be affected by the tragedy and there by waynes as an extension, not alfred. Alfred is never part of the equation as parent only the care giver. Ofcourse, there might be exceptions to the rule like Darknight trilogy. But, they aren't the norm. If and When alfred is written to be the father, there is always a transformation in bruce as a character . He becomes the universal hero, which he isn't .just look at the tone of the panels you posted. Bruce is showing more his slave morality akin to clark.

It isn't a rabbit hole, if you say eugenics was soo tied to Friedrich Nietzsche’s notion of a philosophical “overman” (Übermensch) then just pull out the lines that made you believe that. I don't believe so and i didn't find much.

Furthermore, Just look at the comment section. I wasn't the only one who thought that. So, my claim isn't an absurd notion. "So, nietzsche wants us to be batman". Superman doesn't fit the bill in anyhow. Also, sherlock Holmes was used by germans as well as the allied forces. They took alot of things for their propaganda. Propaganda works like that. If you don't see nietzschian que's in batman and guts. That's fine. For me, it comes across as blunt. They try too damn hard for batman. It's similar superjesus. Sheesh! Last thing i want is clark kent with messiah complex.

Sure but, he would be significantly less influential. He isn't as is with it, as superman. Superman represents quintessential religious and mythical thought.Just like religion doesn't die. Superman is engraved into the minds of the society. That's changing ofcourse. But for now, superman isn't dead.

That's debatable the symbol can be equated to a bat that easily.As for knowing, it isn't necessary.I mean, we don't call these guys batheroes. We call them superheroes.

[Ascended]

No need to apologize, haha. I posted a video of that scene in another thread not that long ago.

You know, I think I saw that?

DC's writing hasn't been consistently great enough to keep Superman #1, but I think he's continually going to stay outside the top two as long as he doesn't have solo TV cartoons, his Hollywood movies are mediocre, and other characters will have better toy products.

I think there's a ton of reasons why Clark doesn't sell like he used to. Lack of quality, lack of consistency, lack of strong appearances in larger media, all that stuff.

I agree that quality alone won't be enough to bring sales back up, but not because young readers have a harder time getting into Clark's headspace. I don't think the direct market has many young readers anymore. And even if it did, this never got in the way of Clark selling before (though reader insert characters like Robin and Billy Batson definitely helped their franchise's sales back in the day). No, I think one of the main problems now is expectation. For years and years, DC has taught us that we can't expect consistency or quality from Superman. They will reboot him, restart him, retcon major aspects of his character and history, marry him, erase the marriage, marry him again.....and all the while the quality itself will be well below what other characters get. And it seems that every time a creator is starting to get Superman sorted out with some level of consistency and quality, DC rips the creator away, throws D-list talent on the books as a replacement, and tears down all the work the previous guy did. So why bother getting invested?

On the "sales" thread a lot of us say that Superman sells what Superman sells, and it's largely true. The fans who are willing to stick around through DC's bullsh*t are already reading, and everybody else has learned that even if the books are to their liking right now, that'll change within 24 issues. So why bother?

And of course, we have some pretty big divides in the fandom now. Pre-Crisis, post-Crisis, and I think we can maybe count Rebirth as a new, third faction. Satisfying all three factions is probably impossible. I mean, look at Bendis; he's tried to incorporate elements from across Clark's history without removing or rebooting anything and people still bitch.

[manwhohaseverything]

Here we're talking about popular opinion. In popular opinion there really isn't that sort of separation by distinction. Batman is frankly close enough when you consider that the most popular current "ninja" fiction has them in daycares, colleges, as female mayors, and listening to hip hop. On the other hand despite being one of the most popular fictional detectives, it's not like he resembles people with the actual job of detective either




Clark is Superman, they're as "real" as one another. Superman is a journalist in that he graduated school in journalism and benefits from a personal career in journalism. Ethically he has a problem, but because it's not communicated by the writers as something that makes him a bad person I guess it's easily overlooked.




Batman's different versions don't really require him to appropriate if that's what you mean. He can reach a Japanese audience as is and we get stuff like Batmanga. This poll is again surprising to me because I haven't seen Superman ported over like Batman and Spider-Man have been.

Fare enough, i just don't view batman as a figure is comparable to ninja, ninja systems in original lore. He can be seen as a popculture ninja by people. But, that's entirely a different deal. Damian on the other hand is the only one i view as a ninja. That too if and when the league acts japanese and not middle eastern. I wouldn't have minded the ninja thing had damian been used as the lead. The kid exemplifies everything such a system produces. Ninjas aren't just cool. They are brutal assassin, trained /more like brain washed from birth to be weapons. Bruce might know some techniques.but bruce learning techniques, things like kendo or many martial arts techniques that doesn't require that kinda thing is different.

Yeah! But, that guy doesn't need glasses, isn't timid, terrified, unnoticeable or wierd. Getting a degree and being an ethical journalist is different. I am emphasising ethical part. Clark became a journalist to keep his exploits in check and to find them. I have trouble calling lois and perry journalists when it comes to superman as a subject. Which is another reason i want dailystar around to call out foul. But, perry atleast doesn't pull punches sometimes when it comes to things like collateral damage. Lois on the otherhand isn't objective at all. I even doubt clark likes the job. He might like the friends and writing itself. Beyond that clark as journalist is too personal. I think clark would be more of an activist and a writer, than a journalist. If he were real, that is. He likes people. But a journalist, no way.

Appropriation is a nice word for it. The problem with doing so is, he becomes more focused on one culture and sometimes the creators have no idea what the aspects of that specific culture is and do something that just takes me out of the story instantly. I guess, it's similar to the torquasm thing with superman. He can reach audiences, i won't deny that and i do believe universal approach is better. I just hate this notion that bruce is japanese, chinese, iranian.. Etc all the while, being an american to boot, just because he is batman.lol!

Samurai jack travels the world as well. But, he is never treated as an insider of other cultures,Only an outsider.Jack is very much a ronin or samurai (i guess, his father and mission to kill aku is his master). It must also be why samurai jack never irritated me that way.

[DochaDocha]

Does DC re-assign creative talent, or does the talent not want to stick around for long?

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

No, i am not. This was always about comparison. Btw, i didn't just bring in anime characters. Furthermore, you basically brought two examples. That's less than nothing compared to superman. Who's copies keep getting made.

First off, again, I listed at least three. Secondly, there are several more examples that you can choose to dig up or ignore, your choice. Thirdly, some of the examples you listed, I wouldn't call truly inspired by Superman. And lastly, again, this is almost unrelated to the topic we're discussing. The fact that All-Might exists does not logically lead to the conclusion that his creator doesn't know about Batman. In fact, his creator absolutely does know about Batman since he also created a Batman analog.

Training in ninjutsu wouldn't make you ninja. Just because i learned some music doesn't mean i am musician. There is a difference.

Except, again, Bruce not only trained in it but mastered ninjutsu. If you mastered playing the guitar, then yes, I could call you a musician.

Clark's interests are upto the writers. Clark can learn taichi if some guy wanted to. That's besides the point.

Except, again, traditionally, no writers have shown Clark training as a swordsman or adhering to the Bushido code. Traditionally, however, writers have frequently shown Bruce training extensively in martial arts.

Him being a martial artist wouldn't make him a ninja. A ninja system is based on clans, communities.. Etc. Sheesh! If bruce can't be an amazon neither can he become a ninja. These guys are born into these miltary complexes.

You do know that the ninja recruited people into those clans, right? Even you said a few posts back that ninja was a military distinction. So, which is it? A military rank or do you have to be born a ninja??

Regardless, Bruce has mastered ninjitsu. If you don't like that, take it up with DC Comics.

No, it hasn't. He used to live in suburbs. He wasn't a farmboy until postcrisis reboot and donner movies. Sheesh! Farmboy thing was later on addition.

Dude. The Kent Farm first appeared in More Fun Comics #101 in 1945. Superman has been a farmboy since at least the 1940s.

moses, krishna.. Etc also have that similar plot points. Would that mean superman is an adaptation of moses or krishna? No. Storyline point and concepts are two different thing. These guys are prophets, demigods, gods, avatars.. Etc. superman is conceptually an alien. Dude! The intention of akira toriyama wasn't to adapt superman(as if goku is a superman adaptation. Having same plot point doesn't mean it's an adaptation. It only mean they have same archetype ) . Superman was nowhere in his mind originally. Sun wukong was. Saiyan thing was a later on introduced. Superman can as a concept be adapted into a movie without much change because conceptually, he is an alien strongman vigilante. Those are universal concepts. People would be able to identify with him regardless of whether you are an iranian or american.if superman needs to become an alien martial artist with bushido values. Then guess what? His entire concept changes.my complaint regarding the batman marketing and title "ninja" is this, precisely . This kinda thing does mean the character needs to be changed to fit into a culture and that in my opinion is bad. But, superman doesn't need to. Which has always been my stance as a strongman, he is universal. Goku was designed to be a separate character.He wasn't meant to be seen as japanese superman or superman 2.0. So saying goku is an adaptation of superman is preposterous statement. Goku has taken inspirations from superman just like sunwukong.Goku isn't an adaptation of sun wukong either.

You yourself identified Goku as a character that took direct inspiration from Superman. So, you can't have it both ways. Is Goku a Superman derivative or is he his own character? If the former, then we have to ask why did the Superman myth need to be adapted in such a way if Superman is so universally applicable and every culture can immediately gravitate toward him. If the latter, then that would mean that Superman didn't have as much influence as you suggested.

OR, we can just admit that being adapted is not a sign of weakness and therefore the fact that Batman is adapted is not any sort of indictment on the Batman brand.

Dude, the guy could talk to snakes thanks to voldemort. he was connected to voldermort. his Petronas charm was of the charts for a rookie. hermoine works hard too. She wasn't the chosen one nor did she perform the feats harry did.just look at the wand choosing ceremony. Oliwander says "we can expect great things from you too".And he did.

So, what you're saying then is that he wasn't born with those gifts, then. He got them from Voldemort. Also, I'm pretty sure the argument could be made that Hermione is a better wizard than Harry. I don't remember Harry really being billed as "the most powerful wizard in the world." He accomplished great things, but again, that came about through hard work and a lot of hardship. However, there were a lot of wizards who were more powerful and more skilled than Harry.

They don't need to. It's the subtext. Hera is the reason hercules performs the twelve labours. She spur him into action as an antagonistic mother figure. Hercules wouldn't be a hero without hera. He even marries her daughter after his ascension further cementing the mother connection . Polydectus situation is similar interms of influence. They both affect the protagonist negatively, while developing or pushing them into the heroes they need to become. They are both the inverses of father and mother for respective heroes. Both of them belong to the nurture set. Hera driving hercules into madness mean his nurture(environment) drove him into madness. But hercules has innate good in so redeemed himself with labour and becomes the a legend.

Spurring him to perform the twelve labors does not make her a mother figure. That's just your takeaway. That is in no way the final word. In fact, Heracles took on the twelve labors because Hera forced him to kill his own sons. Not very motherly.

It isn't a wider net. Two sets.a Set can contain any number of elements or types. provided it satisfies a condition or a number of conditions. Here, the conditions are simple. Does the kid have two groups of parents which signify nature and nurture? That's it. Furthermore, they need to be parents/relatives not caretakers. To quote itachi

When you expand the criteria, that means you're casting a wider net.

Again, have i said alfred doesn't love bruce? No. Those thing doesn't make you a father or mother archetype. Alfred doesn't influence bruce's decisions.

So now you are literally ignoring evidence from the books themselves simply to argue something that is not supported by any evidence whatsoever.

How is that me moving goal post? You said alfred is bruce's parent on the nurture side. I disagree. I am providing my reasons to believe that. no positive parent will allow a child to choose Vigilantism.

It's moving the goalposts because you said a "set of parents" doesn't have to be a mother and father. Then, when I gave you the perfect example of a father figure in Alfred you decide it doesn't count for bogus reasons that actually refute the books themselves. And, again, your reasons aren't valid because the comics themselves identify Alfred as a father figure to Bruce. Bruce literally celebrates Alfred on Father's Day. Your refusal to accept that is a refusal to accept what is in the actual comics.

Also, by your own reasoning, the Kents weren't real parents because they allowed Clark to also choose vigilantism.

It isn't a rabbit hole, if you say eugenics was soo tied to Friedrich Nietzsche’s notion of a philosophical “overman” (Übermensch) then just pull out the lines that made you believe that. I don't believe so and i didn't find much.

It is a rabbit hole. Because we're not talking about who is and isn't an ubermensch (though actually, many would say Superman represent Nietche's philosophy). What we're talking about is the influence of the brands.

Sure but, he would be significantly less influential. He isn't as is with it, as superman. Superman represents quintessential religious and mythical thought.Just like religion doesn't die. Superman is engraved into the minds of the society. That's changing ofcourse. But for now, superman isn't dead.

Dude. Superman would be significantly less influential without the backing he's gotten from DC. You think that if DC hadn't consistently pushed Superman-related media for 80 years that he'd still be as famous?? So, yes, Batman is famous because DC backs him a lot. But neither Batman nor Superman would even exist without DC's promotion. And Batman would still be one of the most famous characters in the world even if DC pushed him just as much as they push Superman. Like, you're just denying reality.

That's debatable the symbol can be equated to a bat that easily.As for knowing, it isn't necessary.I mean, we don't call these guys batheroes. We call them superheroes.

Are bats not animals in real life?? Pretty sure anyone could see that it's a stylized bat and they know that that is what Batman wears. Also, the term "superhero" dates back to 1917, about 21 years before Superman's debut.

[JAK]

Does DC re-assign creative talent, or does the talent not want to stick around for long?

Depends on the time; I'm pretty sure Jurgens and Tomasi would have been happy to stick around a good deal longer - in fact, it would have been interesting to see what would've happened to Henshaw, specifically, had Jurgens continued. Not to mention finally getting (real) answers to Mr. Oz./Jor-El.

[manwhohaseverything]

truncated

That's besides the point. So what?he didn't choose batman like character for mentor role of deku. That's my point. Examples where of superman's cultural impact. Those characters had superman blatant influences. There were characters from other countries as well. We were comparing off the top of head. I had provided more examples.The examples i provided were just tip of the iceberg. I know there might thousands more by Google it. Regardless, i believe superman just trumps batman in that regards.

Learning to throw shuriken, smoke bombs does not mean he is a ninja. He would never be initiated into the society and he would be less skilled, talented.. Etc than kids born into it. The guy started training at 10 or similar age.

Tradition, shemedtion!superman has changed and there are hundreds, thousands of versions of him. A guy who became samurai wouldn't be a stretch.He would be like rurouni kenshin. Granted he wouldn't be strongman, so that is changing the concept. I wouldn't recommend it as necessary. He can be a samurai on the side. That's very possible.

Ninjas rarely, very rarely for special occasions recruit people from outside . They were closed societies. Even, Darkknight trilogy acknowledged that. Guess what? He failed to become part of the league of shadows. He isn't a ninja. Ranks are given according to talent, experience.. Etc. Having a ranking system or authority hierarchy doesn't mean the system or societies are open. These guys make child soldiers and train them from early childhood. Spartans also had systems like that. Again, learning something and being part of that society are two different things. Batman ain't a ninja. He is an outsider to every culture that isn't American, unless Written otherwise like the russian batman.

Read superboy#1 1949, it has him living attending highschool in Metropolis. Furthermore, smallville when introduced in second or third issue it wasn't much of a farm. Legion book had him be picked up from what looks like a city like structure as well, not farmlands. That wasn't much of a focus. There might have been trials prior to post crisis of the farmlands things. But, it wasn't cemented nor focused much. Regardless, superman himself is an alien strongman vigilante or strongman vigilante from space. That was what he was pitched as. The core concept of the character . Clark kent being farmboy or journalist or firefighter or doctor isn't main focus. Superman is what the books are about and his concept is what matter. Superboy doing farming wasn't ever written in the older comics. The best was him doing household chores. Those are different. Furthermore, focus was superboy's strongman aspects and exploits.He even had competitions.

Just because goku exists with a different concept and is inspired by superman,Doesn't mean superman himself needs to change as concept(ie, alien strongman vigilante) to appeal to a Japanese guy or indian guy or Indonesian guy. Allmight is also a strongman. You know what kind of training deku went through under allmight to be able to contain his power. Wait for it.... Strongman training.He cleaned a beach with his bare hands.Japanese people had no trouble with that. Furthermore, goku isn't an adaptation or derivation of superman. That's like saying superman is a derivation of moses.Japanese people would eatup superman as a strongman.

He got them as days old baby. Not much of a difference . He accomplished great things because he had the potential to do so in the first place which realised through his work. Great by nature, focused by nurture. He wasn't dubbed the most powerful(superboy wasn't either) . But he was seen as a special child from the get go. Every mother loves their baby. Yet, harry potter is the only baby that survived. I am sure voldemort has killed other families. It was always meant to be. Harry potter isn't rock lee. Why are you hammering "hard work", "hard work". Working hard doesn't negate greatness or innate talent. Sasuke uchiha, kakashi, minato.. Etc works hard too.those two aren't mutually exclusive. Hermoine understood that in the first adventure itself. It harry who confronted voldemort.

Yes, it does. Why? It helped build or cement hercules's character. Talking to a brick wall, here. Sheesh! Devouring mothers are inverses. I will tell you a story from hindu story. "Poothana" is a demoness that tried to kill krishna by giving poisoness milk as a baby. Krishna kills her by draining her dry. Upon ascending to the world of vishnu, vishnu basically runs to her and calls her mother. "poothana" is a devouring mother.You might say Poothana isn't krishna's mother. But, the world of archetypes doesn't work that way. Text, subtext and contexts matter. Poothana builds krishna's character. Therefore, she is the mother archetype in inverse form.

Where did i expand the criteria?conditions was always simple. Does the kid have two sets of "parents" nature and nurture? Emphasise on parents. i thought set theory was basic maths. A set of fruit can accommodate apple and oranges. It wouldn't be a wider net. You want me to draw a venn diagram or what?

That's the thing, alfred didn't raise bruce. So how can he be a father figure? It isn't bogus. I wasn't raised by my grandma and grandpa. I love those guys and i would even give them fathers day or mothers day gifts. Does that mean they are my parents? No. They didn't build or affect my character.They had no say in what i became,Similar to bruce and alfred. Parents impact a child's character. Peter parker was impacted by his aunt and uncle. He derives character from them. That's what a parent does. Alfred pennyworth doesn't do that for bruce wayne,normally. Him giving a father's day means he loves alfred. I have never denied that fact. Have i? But, that doesn’t mean bruce wayne has any of alfred's essence. There is no alfred in bruce. There is jor el and jonathan in clark. The madness is hera in heracles. Perseus's journey is polydectus in him. You can say Poothana is krishna's strength as barefisted fighter.

I specifically pointed out sasuke and itachi. Itachi is sasuke's brother,so is naruto. Why? Because these two impact sasuke's character. These guys are antagonistic towards each other and i wouldn't call them brotherly towards each other. But, they are brothers. Damian wayne and Jonathan kent are brothers as well. No matter how abusive or supportive it might get. Jon and damian are stuck with each other. Similar to how hercules is stuck with hera.

Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that superman's parents wanted him becoming a vigilante. And after comics code took incharge, superman wasn't treated as a vigilante and he became just a superhero. His father wanted him to help people when right time came, until then hide his strength, before that. Not go out in a strongman suit and beat up people. His parents died before clark kent became superman. Vigilante aspect of the character has been dead for years.When was the last time superman was an outlaw who ran from police? Exactly. This has been a constant complaint of mine. Strongman aspect is also not acknowledged, though present. But these are different issues all together. Bruce wayne's relationship with the police is frenemies at best.he is a vigilante through and through. So is spiderman. Superman basically ignores his vigilante origin and side of the character. He is presented as a paragon, a messiah, an example for humanity.

What???? That is the most absurd thing i ever heard. So much so, Its laughable. Superman represents squat. He is basically kantian deontology wrapped up in a strongman suit and a cape.He is basically god or a prophet himself when it comes to iconography since he is moses archetype . He would be dead in nietzsche's world. Superman would be taken apart by the cynics brick by brick. Until he is either the devil(injustice man) or a hollow shell of himself. There is a reason why superman gets beat up by batman. Its entirely natural for man to side with the ubermensch, than god. This discussion was had in the controversial thread. Superman basically denies his shadow. An ubermensch would be one with it. He would be like a tree with roots deep into depths of darkness and branches high into the sky. He would be both the snake and the eagle. Superman is no ubermensch.why?because he rejects the snake or the roots. He wouldn't be out there giving sermons to other people to follow him or what to do. He wouldn't try to set an example. Superman does.superman is exactly what nietzsche was arguing against. Zarathustra failed. Clark will fail as well.

Oh Yeah! The most culturally impacted superman(fleischer cartoons) theatrical release wasn't by wb nor dc. Superman has mostly mediocre media adaptations. Donner movie was an exception for its time, back in the 70s. It's 2020, now. These guys do squat for superman.Meanwhile, people use concept of superman to do all sorts of things elsewhere.superman is perceived as this lame ass character and this perception is perpetuated by the company itself. When in reality the character has much more to offer.yes, i think he would be great without dc's so called backing than with it. Because the character speaks for itself. If you ask me even the public domain would suit the character better. Wonderwoman's state was even in worse condition. She was getting over despite, dc. She got a movie because of mcu. Lo and behold! It became a success.

I don't thinks, so. I will believe it when i see it regarding bruce being pushes at the level of superman. Tell you what? Have bruce lose to wonderwoman, hal jordan, aquaman.. Etc and whomever that wishes to test strength, when bruce has prepped. Then we will talk.

Pretty sure, that ain't the case. An ink blot is susceptible to interpretation. An s is s, it isn't a t or b.

Anyways, this is just going in circles i am out.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

That's besides the point. So what?he didn't choose batman like character for mentor role of deku. That's my point. Examples where of superman's cultural impact. Those characters had superman blatant influences.

Except that's not dispositive of anything. I'm sure the examples I provided were also the tip of the iceberg. And again, anyone who makes a character based on Superman probably knows who Batman is. That is a given.

Learning to throw shuriken, smoke bombs does not mean he is a ninja. He would never be initiated into the society and he would be less skilled, talented.. Etc than kids born into it. The guy started training at 10 or similar age.

Tradition, shemedtion!superman has changed and there are hundreds, thousands of versions of him. A guy who became samurai wouldn't be a stretch.He would be like rurouni kenshin. Granted he wouldn't be strongman, so that is changing the concept. I wouldn't recommend it as necessary. He can be a samurai on the side. That's very possible.

You realize this is a huge double standard you're applying here, right? Batman, despite decades of being shown as a master martial artist, cannot become a ninja. However, Superman, despite never picking up a katana in his life, can all of a sudden become a samurai, which also trained members from childhood??? The fact that you would claim this shows a) clear bias on your part and b) your unwillingness to listen to evidence.

Ninjas rarely, very rarely for special occasions recruit people from outside . They were closed societies. Even, Darkknight trilogy acknowledged that. Guess what? He failed to become part of the league of shadows. He isn't a ninja. Ranks are given according to talent, experience.. Etc. Having a ranking system or authority hierarchy doesn't mean the system or societies are open. These guys make child soldiers and train them from early childhood.

Actually, ninja tended to recruit people from the lower classes of Japanese society. They weren't as exclusive as you think. People weren't born into ninja clans. They basically chose child recruits from the lower class families and trained them up.

And the example from the Dark Knight trilogy is a bad example because Bruce basically chose not to be a member of the League of Shadows because he didn't approve of their methods. It wasn't because he wasn't good enough. He was more than good enough. He just didn't want to kill people. And the League of Shadows of the Dark Knight trilogy apparently had no issue recruiting a tall Irishman in Ra's al Ghul.

But for the millionth time, Batman: Ninja doesn't mean they literally made Batman a ninja. It's just the title of an anime movie that, no, is not about Batman becoming a ninja.

Read superboy#1 1949, it has him living attending highschool in Metropolis. Furthermore, smallville when introduced in second or third issue it wasn't much of a farm. Legion book had him be picked up from what looks like a city like structure as well, not farmlands.

Here's a scan from More Fun Comics #101:



See that panel where Superboy is leaping with a building in the background? Yeah, that's a barn with hay in it. And not only is that definitely a farm, but it also predates the Superboy series. And the Superboy series very much portrayed Smallville as a small town. A small town with plenty of farmland. So, sorry to burst your bubble, but you're 100% wrong. To argue otherwise would mean that you're literally going against the comics themselves.

Just because goku exists with a different concept and is inspired by superman,Doesn't mean superman himself needs to change as concept(ie, alien strongman vigilante) to appeal to a Japanese guy or indian guy or Indonesian guy. Allmight is also a strongman. You know what kind of training deku went through under allmight to be able to contain his power. Wait for it.... Strongman training.He cleaned a beach with his bare hands.Japanese people had no trouble with that.

And just because Batman has a movie called Batman: Ninja doesn't mean that Batman has to change as a concept, especially when said movie is actually about the same old Batman who we know and love who is time-displaced to feudal Japan, not an alt. universe ninja-Batman.

Also, what type of training do you think Bruce underwent to become Batman?? Uh, severe martial arts training. You'd think that, with all the martial arts anime out there, from Yu Yu Hakasho to Naruto and beyond, Japanese audiences would be more than receptive to Batman. And actually, the large amount of Batman anime and manga adaptations (not just Batman: Ninja) would suggest that, yes, they are...

Furthermore, goku isn't an adaptation or derivation of superman. That's like saying superman is a derivation of moses.

Uh, yes he is and no it's not, because Goku was basically given Superman's exact origin.

He got them as days old baby. Not much of a difference .

But your criteria demands him being great "by nature." If he got it from Voldemort, it's not "his nature" now is it?

Yes, it does. Why? It helped build or cement hercules's character. Talking to a brick wall, here. Sheesh! Devouring mothers are inverses.

Lol. Again, just because you're saying it over and over again, doesn't make it true. Hera would be a "devouring mother" archetype if she was actually Heracles's mother. She's not. She's the villain of his story basically. Furthermore, how in the world do you square disqualifying Alfred for "not raising Bruce" (a claim that's actually false, by the way) yet you say that Hera is a mother figure to Heracles when she did not raise Heracles??

Where did i expand the criteria?conditions was always simple.

Uh, when you said a "set of parents" didn't need to only be a mother and a father set when I pointed out that Perseus was raised by a single mother and several other examples that didn't fit the "two sets of parents" set up that Superman has.

That's the thing, alfred didn't raise bruce. So how can he be a father figure? It isn't bogus.

Uh, Alfred did raise Bruce after his parents died. Like, there are many examples from the comics themselves that show that Alfred was Bruce's guardian after Bruce's parents died. Also, straight from the Batman wiki: "Alfred Pennyworth had been the Wayne Family butler all of Bruce's life and had helped his master establish his superhero career from the beginning. In addition, he was Bruce's legal guardian following the deaths of his parents."

I'm going to take that as confirmation that you don't read Batman comics.

Similar to how hercules is stuck with hera.

Heracles being stuck with Hera does not make her his mother. Like, that's ridiculous.

Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that superman's parents wanted him becoming a vigilante.

Well in many modern recountings of Superman's origin, Ma Kent even makes him his superhero costume. Also, the official definition of a vigilante according to Merriam-Webster is "a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily (as when the processes of law are viewed as inadequate)" or, more broadly, "a self-appointed doer of justice." Under that definition, all superheroes are vigilantes and Superman most definitely qualifies.

What???? That is the most absurd thing i ever heard. So much so, Its laughable. Superman represents squat. He is basically kantian deontology wrapped up in a strongman suit and a cape.He is basically god or a prophet himself when it comes to iconography since he is moses archetype .

I'm just telling you what the general consensus is. Even the thumbnail of the video you posted has Nietzsche's face pasted on Superman's body. And, if we are talking about the übermensch as the ultimate aspirational goal of human beings, a lot of people see a being at least a little like Superman as the aspirational end goal.

Oh Yeah! The most culturally impacted superman(fleischer cartoons) theatrical release wasn't by wb nor dc. Superman has mostly mediocre media adaptations. Donner movie was an exception for its time, back in the 70s. It's 2020, now. These guys do squat for superman

1) The Max Fleischer cartoons are not the most influential portrayals of Superman. That would be the Donner movies. Also, they were from the time before WB even purchased DC. WB purchased DC in 1967. And how do you think Paramount was even able to distribute those cartoons. They'd have to have communicated with DC.

2) So, regardless of the Max Fleischer cartoons, you're saying that the George Reeves TV series, the Richard Donner film series, Superman Returns, the Superman Animated series and the DCAU, the numerous animated films, Man of Steel and the DCEU, and even the numerous blockbuster events in the comics counts as...squat? A few of those media adaptations were lackluster, but that is not the result of "lack of investment" from WB or DC.

I don't thinks, so. I will believe it when i see it regarding bruce being pushes at the level of superman. Tell you what? Have bruce lose to wonderwoman, hal jordan, aquaman.. Etc

LOL. Bruce has lost to at least a few of those guys.

Pretty sure, that ain't the case. An ink blot is susceptible to interpretation. An s is s, it isn't a t or b.

Sure it's not the case. [/s]. Also, you do know that other cultures have different alphabets, right?

[manwhohaseverything]

truncated

You said that already and my response remain the same.

Truncated

Allow me to simplfy things for, i had training with a sword. I learned kendo for the heck of it. It can be learned by anyone, at any age. I can be a samurai if pledge myself to a master. Superman can learn kendo and he is a paragon so can pledge himself. He can be a samurai. Batman can be a samurai. You can be a samurai . A ninja is different.

Truncated

Sure, that's basically how they do it. It isn't recruitment more like kidnapping . Bruce wayne was above the age margin for the recruitment process. Bruce was 10 or something . It is largely exclusive societies . The children thus taken never normally see their parent(if any). They become mercenaries. Furthermore, children of clans are still set a top of a food chain.

Truncated

But for the millionth time, Batman: Ninja doesn't mean they literally made Batman a ninja. It's just the title of an anime movie that, no, is not about Batman becoming a ninja.
Who said i had no problem with the irishman being ra' s? I did.
Well, guess what? Ninja's are assassin's. If bruce doesn't like their code of conduct or ethics. He cannot be a part of them. He didn't chose, he failed by not following the sencho's order.two things, following orders is absolute for a ninja. A ninja must get rid of his emotions. Bruce wayne is emo goth.

And for the same billionth time, then it's false advertising. making karate kid about kung fu is also nonsense.

truncated.

Dude, you said that already. First issue was set in Metropolis. Predating something doesn't mean it was cemented. Smallville was suburban region of metropolis, originally. They weren't the countryside Nor was Clark being a farmer ever relevant or even true. He didn't do anything farmers did. Look at smallville tv series, that guy is a farmer through and through.





Btw,i am not the one who is in bubble. Superman is a palimpsest.

Truncated

Martial arts are different types and have different training method. Some require a life, from child hood to master. For instance, many martial practices in india require you to stay with your guru from childhood and learn. Furthermore, batman used ninja for marketing.Batman anime manga was produced by the company. There was literally one anime movie(gotham knight) before ninja. That's it.

They create martial arts of their own culture,with inspiration from other cultures like chinese, Korean and indian. There is difference between that and outsiders perspective. American did same **** with godzilla. Godzilla was about Japanese trauma about atomic bomb. The Americans took it, lo and behold! An american protagonist and american perspective for their audience. Furthermore, i have never said that japanese have problem with martial arts. All i have said is don't use iconography of another culture so casually. Batman being martial arts master is vague nonsense, so that he can be shoved into any country as an insider and not only reduce the natives into stereotypes, but reduce the value of a true insider.

Uh, yes he is and no it's not, because Goku was basically given Superman's exact origin.

Superman is basically given moses's or krishna's origin. I didn't know superman was an avatar or prophet. Then again, postcrisis superman never shuts up. He is all about sermons.

But your criteria demands him being great "by nature." If he got it from Voldemort, it's not "his nature" now is it?

Sasuke, neji.. Etc got dojutsu. Naruto got kyubi. Harry potter having chaos in him is pretty much "nature". Kyubi was also antagonist.

Truncated

Why Is poothana krishna's mother? If She is not.then why did vishnu call poothana his mother? Why did heracles marry hera's daughter? Why was that plot point required? Because raising someone requires you to impact the character of the person. It pains me but i have my biological parents in me to a great deal. Bruce has thomas wayne and martha wayne in him, but never alfred.

Truncated

I said, two sets of parents one for nature and another for nurture . I had no set no criteria for number of contents or types or even nature of relationship with eachother.

Two sets of parents. Great by nature, focused by nurture . Journey to find a place to fit in. Fights and slays serpents or dragons or demon to save the damsel and get the hidden treasure .
Harry potter and superman fit the bill. Does batman fit the bill? No. Before you take this dragons and serpents as literal. It isn't. And even if it is superman used to fighy giant green lizards. Harry potter, superman, krishna, karna, moses... Etc. Superman is the quintessential hero pattern that are part of every culture, that repeat itself more often than any other.

Here is my original comment regarding the universal hero archetype.

Truncated.

You can. Company can say whatever they want. The books themselves do not portray alfred as bruce's parent. If and when i start seeing alfred in bruce then i will believe it. Furthermore, whenever alfred does become bruce's parent like in Darkknight trilogy or the page youshowed. Bruce adopts slave morality. He becomes like clark.He adopts all the characteristics of universal hero. But, alfred at large doesn't impact bruce's choices.

Heracles being stuck with Hera does not make her his mother. Like, that's ridiculous.

It does. Trust me, dude.We are stuck with family and you can't get it out of your system. A family member ain't like girlfriend. It's much, much, much harder to get rid off.Sanji was raised by zeff and is his father. He didn't want anything to do with his "father". But, at the end of the day his father is also his father and he saved him.

truncated
.

That's later nonsense. Where superman has denounced his vigilante side and comics code came to be. When they started "clark you must help people with police" thing. Furthermore, pa and ma started spoonfed ridiculous morality that has no basis and is laughable when it comes to depth from actual parents. Before that these guys build his character. But, superman didn't become proxies for them. And vigilante takes law into their own hand. When that happens they become criminals. Superman isn't treated like one. When had the dailyplanet called superman a menace? When has dan turpin or maggie sawyer set the dogs or book on him? Exactly. Dammit! We need the dailstar badly. Dailyplanet needs a counter balance. Superman hasn't been a vigilante. The last vestiges of his vigilante aspect was his dual identity. Guess what happened? Its gone. Superman is just a superhero. It's a damn shame. No more, pulpfiction scifi action hero. No more, Vigilante strongman from space. He is dead.

Truncated .

That's for getting people's attention. Also, the lose translation of ubermensch,makes it seem like superman fits. He doesn't. Superman is zarathustra. He dostoevsky's jesus in the grand inquisitor. He is basically the church. He fails precisely for the same.The church or many other religious institution is also aspirational for many. But, that is exactly what nietzsche was against. Clark kent ignores dark desires or doesn't have them. He is untouched by the seven deadly sin. Church wants people to supress, throw away, ignore the dark desires or temptations. Not embrace, deal with them, control them and use it for postitvity. Clark kent has no dealings with the snake. Incase, you haven't noticed bible hates snakes.And superman only embraces the eagle .bruce has dealings with both snake and the eagle. Both the dragon and the phoenix . Ofcourse, i am talking about the current so called "classic" superman. He is a tree without roots.
If and when superman's shadow isn't rejected by him. Then we will talk. When he is acknowledged as the vigilante then we will talk. When he stops trying and does it. Then we will talk.

Truncated

Did i say that donner movies aren't ? Without max fleischer cartoons starwars sword fights will be stick fights. Godzilla, iron giant, miyazaki movies... Etc are all influenced by the cartoons. Donner was the reason those movies were remotely good for the time. And wb basically threw him out. They would have. But, paramount is the one approaching seeing superman's success if i remember. Furthermore,that still doesn't change dc is largely has been not successful with their ips not named batman.

Truncated .

Max fleischer cartoons,George reeves, maybe donner movies had been great. Everything with superman has been mediocre with wb and dc.

LOL. Bruce has lost to at least a few of those guys.

Yeah! Right. With prep he always smokes everyone, everytime .

Sure it's not the case. [/s]. Also, you do know that other cultures have different alphabets, right?

They have. But then s would just be a new symbol. And the british conquered almost the entire world and has infiltrated almost country's boundary . An english alphabet is fairly familiar.