Spiderman vs. Batman vs Superman vs any other superhero series you may like

[Lindy]

<s>Cable and Deadpool</s>

Spiderman, I guess.

As long as it's Ultimate Spiderman though, nothing else cuts it for me any more, if it's not Ultimate, I don't like it.

[Destai]

I prefer Marvel over Deecy by alot. X-Men or Spiderman.

[Parasaurolophus]

Image, good! (image comics inc.)

[Raistlin]

Batman. Because he's not just a hero because he discovered he has powers. He's a hero boy choice. I mean, if Spiderman didn't have powers, he'd still be a pansy and I don't think he'd be the kind to help a friend out if he was being picked on. Now, Batman. That's a real hero.

There's the kind of superhero who gets his/her name because he/she has superpowers. That's the superhero.
Then there's the kind of superhero who gets his/her name because he wants justice in the world, regardless of having superpowers or not. That's the superhero.

Anyone saying that Spiderman's characters are more real than Batman's is probably forgetting that they have superhuman powers which are, obviously, rather unrealistic.

If I wanted to read about someone struggling to manage their life, I'd read the autobiography of a drug addict or watch a soap opera.

But Bruce Wayne's extremely rich and has everything he wants. Not exactly a realistic character.

Batman Begins was the best superhero movie ever. However, Spider-Man is the better superhero. Go Spidey!

[Loony BoB]

But Bruce Wayne's extremely rich and has everything he wants. Not exactly a realistic character.

Character A is rich and some might say he has everything he wants. Character B can fire web out of his wrists and climb up the sides of buildings using superhuman grip.

Estimate of number of extremely rich people in the world: Thousands.
Estimate of number of people who can fire web from wrists in the world: None.

No superhero is realistic because there are no superheroes in the world. But Batman is untold amounts more realistic than Spiderman.

[My name is...something..?]

Nothing bets spiderman for me. Love it. Carnage is the <img src="/x</>xx.gif"><img src="/x</>xx.gif"><img src="/x</>xx.gif"><img src="/x</>xx.gif">!!!

Heck yeah!!!
Carnage all the way.

[Raistlin]

Character A is rich and some might say he has everything he wants. Character B can fire web out of his wrists and climb up the sides of buildings using superhuman grip.

Estimate of number of extremely rich people in the world: Thousands.
Estimate of number of people who can fire web from wrists in the world: None.

No superhero is realistic because there are no superheroes in the world. But Batman is untold amounts more realistic than Spiderman.

I'm talking about their identities. It's kind of hard to relate to Wayne, because he's rich and famous and has everything. It's easy to relate to Peter Parker, because he's an 18-20-year-old kid, who has all the usual problems: college homework, finding a job, etc.

Parker is by far the better character.

[Del Murder]

If I wanted to read about someone struggling to manage their life, I'd read the autobiography of a drug addict or watch a soap opera.

But what if you want to read about a person with life struggles <i>and</i> superpowers? Don't get me wrong, Batman's great, definitely second best, but I like the fact that super powers isn't the answer to Peter Parker's problems. In fact, it is the cause of most of them. I also like that the people in Peter's life play roles in Spidey's life as well. He can never get away from either role. It's so wonderfully written. Raislin also makes a good point about relatable characters. You can relate to Peter because he is a nerd just like us.

[Loony BoB]

I guess I'm not too eager to relate to Peter Parker because he seems like a bit of a wuss who gets bullied, and I have no desire to remember the days that I was a wuss who got bullied. Again, if I wanted to relate to a nerd, I'd watch a movie about a nerd. Not a superhero movie.

I'm more of a fan of the dark hero than the pansy hero. I'm also a big fan of Wolverine.

[Despotus]

I'm more of a fan of the dark hero than the pansy hero. I'm also a big fan of Wolverine.

Now you're talking about the best damn hero around. Logan, Weapon X, the Wolverine, RULES! I like that he is such a mystery even to himself. And he's been around for more than a century. He also studied the way of the Samurai. As Logan puts it: he is the best there is at what he does, but what he does isn't very nice.

[Raistlin]

I guess I'm not too eager to relate to Peter Parker because he seems like a bit of a wuss who gets bullied, and I have no desire to remember the days that I was a wuss who got bullied. Again, if I wanted to relate to a nerd, I'd watch a movie about a nerd. Not a superhero movie.

I'm more of a fan of the dark hero than the pansy hero. I'm also a big fan of Wolverine.

I also like someone who has to <i>work</i> for what he wants. Before Batman Begins, Batman just freakin' started out with billions of dollars worth of equipment. If I had billions of dollars to waste, I'd make sure I was pretty damn invincible, too.

Parker is poorer than some of us. He goes through all the struggles we'd have to if we suddenly turned superhero - getting a costume, hiding our identity from friends and family, finding time for college and/or work and superheroing, and finding equipment - the movies were retarded in that they had the web come naturally out of his wrist; in the comics, he makes a web-shooter and webbing.

D.C. comics has the tendency to make their superhero's start out perfect, especially earlier on, and starts you in the middle of the story. Batman starts out famous, with billions of dollars, and every possible thing imaginable. With the exception of Batman Begins, the story really starts in the middle. The story of Spiderman begins before he was bitten. So a better story, a better character...oh, and Spiderman has better villains. The Joker's great, but it's tough to beat Spidey badguys. Maybe X-Men bad guys (Magneto's pretty cool).

[Loony BoB]

Hey man, the Penguin, Joker and Catwoman are all great. But X-Men definitely has the better villains in my eyes. X-Men has such a large variety of bad guys that you can't compete. Same with heroes. If we were talking about the different comics/stories in general rather than talking about individual superheroes, I would put X-Men at the front regardless, because I find they have a much more progressive storyline rather than the one-off ordeals that most single-superheroes do.

Yes, the buildup with Spiderman I have to say is better because Batman, as you say, started in the middle of his story. But who is the better superhero? I still say Batman. You could put all the story in the world around someone and they could still be a schmuck. It's who they are that is the superhero, and for me, Batman is superior in that regard.

[Trumpet Thief]

chaos: Superman, or Clark Kent. Not when he is a fully evolved ass-whooper, but when he's more confused with his powers, much like in the show "SmallVille".

Albedo: *Laughs maniacally* For villains, it would have to be Lex Luthor. What could be harder than fighting your former best friend? :chuckle:

[Samuraid]

Spiderman

because if you think about it, he has superior powers...the powers to jump the power to swing the power of incredible senses...batman just looks cool kicking butt

So true.

[Loony BoB]

Using that argument, Superman must surely be the best, unless there's a hero out there with no weaknesses at all.