I guess you don't know a lot about superheroesRastrelly said:
Also I always found it weird that people say Batman is relatable because he doesn't have any superpowers but I relate more to say Starfire than Batman
Can we stop with the "Batman is more relatable than Superman" thing?
- Thread starter Samtemdo8_v1legacy
- Start date
Also I always found it weird that people say Batman is relatable because he doesn't have any superpowers but I relate more to say Starfire than Batman
Oh grand, more reasons to avoid New 52 like the plague.
And for gods sake, can we stop this whole "Batman is invincible" thing. Batman does lose, it happens. The difference is that he rarely has monumental losses. He comes back from his shortcomings for an overall victory. Very much a "losing the battle, but winning the war" kind of hero.
And honestly? That is one of the many reasons he's better than Supes. Because it doesn't take a green rock or a ridiculous god-beast or whatever to do something to him.
And for gods sake, can we stop this whole "Batman is invincible" thing. Batman does lose, it happens. The difference is that he rarely has monumental losses. He comes back from his shortcomings for an overall victory. Very much a "losing the battle, but winning the war" kind of hero.
And honestly? That is one of the many reasons he's better than Supes. Because it doesn't take a green rock or a ridiculous god-beast or whatever to do something to him.
Just what we need, a God of Angst. Can't imagine what spells he'd grant his clergy.
OT; I don't think he has ever been relatable. From the moment you put on a costume and take to the streets to beat up ne'er do wells, you are elevating yourself above the common people. The only way they can relate to you is if they too put on a costume to fight crime.
OT; I don't think he has ever been relatable. From the moment you put on a costume and take to the streets to beat up ne'er do wells, you are elevating yourself above the common people. The only way they can relate to you is if they too put on a costume to fight crime.
Um...yeah. Because the human in said situation might as well be a robot usually for all the emotion he displays and the life he leads and lends to the proceedings. While the alien is pretty much just a regular joe with super powers that he kinda wishes he could get rid of. So literal alien or no, the fact that he looks exactly like a human being, lives as a human, works, and even identifies as a human most of the time...basically it is like trying to argue Star Trek aliens vs terminators. One is obviously more human even if not literally human than the other dressed in human tissue.Squanchy said:
I would like to add my two cents to this, and break things down a little bit. Batman is a relatable fantasy to because we are cynical. Think about Gotham for a moment, the police are viewed as corrupt or incompetent. Gangs dominate newsfeeds and are trying to destroy Gotham/the World. We have Eco Terrorists and just plain nut jobs obsessed with time, or dates, or fixing things, etc.
Look at the world we live in, people view the police force as corrupt or incompetent, terrorists dominate the news, eco-terrorists get a mention ever so often they pull a bone-headed move, or PETA has a 'good idea', and there are dangerous people out there obsessed with a single aspect of life.
Of course we relate to Batman more, he is what we feel we would need to be, a dark force using the enemies tricks against them. Superman, the big blue boy scout, doesn't. He gets involved with bigger events, because he has the power to be there. Batman is an excellent strategist but a terrible role model.
Seriously, think about the hours of planning, exercise, constant vigilance he needs to stay one step ahead of those with powers. No child would ever get to be a kid.
I am not a fan of Superman, mainly because of his vast array of superpowers, and the Deus Ex Machina of reasons he gets to be so much smarter than everyone else, with crystals of learning or whatever excuse. Crap like that pisses me off, it is just a way to 'balance' things out between Supes and Batman.
And remember, Bruce has a job, apparently. He runs Wayne Enterprises, somehow. But I think this really says something to us as a species though.
Instead of being a nigh-immortal being with a vast array of abilities who fails to bring any significant change to the world, we want to be a very mortal being with severe trust issues who spends more time training and strategizing than trying to improve Gotham by actually making sure Arkham Asylum can hold the crazies, and that the prisons actually do their job. A man with the resources that can actually make sure that Gotham PD has the resources needed to ferret out the corruption within its own ranks and actually stand up against the huge amount of gangs within its heart.
I may not like Superman, but I can tell you this. I could do more to help Gotham as Superman, than Batman ever could as Bruce and Batman.
Look at the world we live in, people view the police force as corrupt or incompetent, terrorists dominate the news, eco-terrorists get a mention ever so often they pull a bone-headed move, or PETA has a 'good idea', and there are dangerous people out there obsessed with a single aspect of life.
Of course we relate to Batman more, he is what we feel we would need to be, a dark force using the enemies tricks against them. Superman, the big blue boy scout, doesn't. He gets involved with bigger events, because he has the power to be there. Batman is an excellent strategist but a terrible role model.
Seriously, think about the hours of planning, exercise, constant vigilance he needs to stay one step ahead of those with powers. No child would ever get to be a kid.
I am not a fan of Superman, mainly because of his vast array of superpowers, and the Deus Ex Machina of reasons he gets to be so much smarter than everyone else, with crystals of learning or whatever excuse. Crap like that pisses me off, it is just a way to 'balance' things out between Supes and Batman.
And remember, Bruce has a job, apparently. He runs Wayne Enterprises, somehow. But I think this really says something to us as a species though.
Instead of being a nigh-immortal being with a vast array of abilities who fails to bring any significant change to the world, we want to be a very mortal being with severe trust issues who spends more time training and strategizing than trying to improve Gotham by actually making sure Arkham Asylum can hold the crazies, and that the prisons actually do their job. A man with the resources that can actually make sure that Gotham PD has the resources needed to ferret out the corruption within its own ranks and actually stand up against the huge amount of gangs within its heart.
I may not like Superman, but I can tell you this. I could do more to help Gotham as Superman, than Batman ever could as Bruce and Batman.
No family? So we're ignoring the numerous kids he adopts. And you can say how the money doesn't make him happy, but that doesn't change the fact that Bruce has a life most people can only dream of. Contrast with Superman who grew up on a farm and has been exposed to menial labor. Not to mention how his job as a reporter affords him more of an interaction with the man on the street in the way Bruce doesn't have.Fox12 said:I already have a comixology account.Samtemdo8 said:You clearly never read any of the relevent comic books and now you compare him to the most egregious example of Flavor of the month anime?Fox12 said:Well, he is more relateable then superman. A rock is more relateable then superman. My distaste for the man of steel has only increased after a certain hero blew open how incredibly stupid a bland, OP character really is.
I don't care that Superman is powerful. He's just so boring, and poorly developed. No personality whatsoever.
Cue someone talking about how he's a symbol of hope/what we should aspire to yada yada
Go watch this video and than buy some comic books:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZZwIXn6aSQ
https://www.comixology.com/
Batman is a crazy nutter who lives alone in his mansion. His money doesn't make him happy, and he's got no family except an old man who will probably die soon, and a bunch of awkward teenagers. He absolutely can't get over his parents murder, and refuses to seek help. He spends his nights beating lunatics to a pulp, and his days either resting or tinkering with gadgets. His batman persona has eaten away at him until it's all that's left. Hate, and anger, and vengeance. I can't see him retiring, so he'll probably keep going until he dies. Almost all of his villains are the indirect result of his actions, including the joker, meaning that the city is probably less safe then when he started. Batman is the poster boy for having a self destructive personality. He's a hugely flawed character when handled well, and this makes him more human.
Superman doesn't have those flaws. He's morally perfect all the time. He's as physically powerful as the situation demands, making him a living deus ex machina. That's why I compared him to one punch man. It's silly. I can't relate to any of that. It's not that he's powerful, it's that he's a blatant Mary Sue and hero archetype, which I despise.
Edit: bat god is a pretty bad idea, no doubt. Supermans basically a god all the time, though, and I know for a fact that they've raised him to deity status before. In fact, they've probably made everyone a god at some point. Not very original.
Bruce's intelligence is even more of a Deus ex machina. See this issue where he takes down the entire League
https://scans-daily.dreamwidth.org/4919360.html
Bruce's flaws aren't treated with the seriousness they should be. A real life police department would never put up with him if only to avoid the PR nightmare that would result from allowing an unsanctioned vigilante to operate with impunity. To say nothing of how the Batfamily keeps crawling back to him no matter how secretive and abusive he's been.
Batman isn't more relatable than Superman or even most other heroes. He's just written in an over the top melodramatic way to appeal to angsty teens.
I like Batman, can't stand Superman, it's more that I prefer the darker stories from Gotham than the Shiny ones in Metropolis.
Batman may not have any powers but he has a shitload of money, which he uses to make Gotham a better place.
Superman is pretty much a glorified fireman saving cats from trees.
The only incarnation of Superman that I liked was in the Justice League cartoons, but that was mainly because he wasn't always in it.
Batman may not have any powers but he has a shitload of money, which he uses to make Gotham a better place.
Superman is pretty much a glorified fireman saving cats from trees.
The only incarnation of Superman that I liked was in the Justice League cartoons, but that was mainly because he wasn't always in it.
Well, I can recall four instances of Batman fighting Superman in the comics: The Dark Knight Returns; Batman: Hush; Lex Luthor: Man of Steel; and Superman: Red Son.undeadsuitor said:
In two of those, Batman came out on top, and in the other two, Supes did. That's not the spotless record.
I consider Superman far more relatable than Batman. Regardless of powers, Superman is just a Kansas farmboy who went to school, has to work for a living and in personality is an affable fellow I would actually like to meet.
Batman, on the other hand, was born into level of wealth that would make Smaug blush, and as a boy decided to hone his mind and body to fighting crime (by learning such essential skills for fighting urban crime as steering fighter planes), and in personality is a miserable, rude, aloof dickwad guaranteed to bring down any room he enters.
(Honestly, how much of a douche does a person have to be to compulsively sneak up on people and wait for a dramatic moment to reveal himself?)
Batman, on the other hand, was born into level of wealth that would make Smaug blush, and as a boy decided to hone his mind and body to fighting crime (by learning such essential skills for fighting urban crime as steering fighter planes), and in personality is a miserable, rude, aloof dickwad guaranteed to bring down any room he enters.
(Honestly, how much of a douche does a person have to be to compulsively sneak up on people and wait for a dramatic moment to reveal himself?)
How about we don't, because the simple fact is that he is more relatable then superman, I don't hate superman by any means, he's still in my top 10 favorite superhero's but as far as who is more relatable, batman is just always going to be more relatable, I don't care what the comics do, I never read em
I can see how Batman is more relatable than Superman. Supes is often (not always, but often) presented as an ideal. Never making the morally questionable choices. Never compromising largely because he doesn't have to. It takes the like of Darkseid to even put him into that position and regardless of the choice I doubt he would be questioned. It's why so many alternate reality based storied have Supes as corrupted or otherwise not fighting for the ideals the main story line does. It's because it's different and so far out of character, even though the difference might not be all that dramatic.
Bats on the other hand is nowhere near the ideal. He makes hard choices, he questions them and is questioned for them. Though he will not use guns, he doesn't ascribe to "thou shalt not kill" if it comes down to it. Put him in a situation where he has to kill a criminal to save an innocent person he won't hesitate, even though he'll be called a murderous thug after. And he doesn't walk off saying "I did good" either. He'll question whether he did the right thing or if there was a way to stop said criminal without lethal force. Put Batman in a tough situation and he'll make the hard choice. Then he'll live with the hard choice after.
Supes is mostly presented as how humanity wants to be, Batman is presented how humanity is. Both want to do the right thing and show it can be done. The difference is that Superman makes it look easy while Batman shows just how hard it can be. That's what makes him more relatable.
Bats on the other hand is nowhere near the ideal. He makes hard choices, he questions them and is questioned for them. Though he will not use guns, he doesn't ascribe to "thou shalt not kill" if it comes down to it. Put him in a situation where he has to kill a criminal to save an innocent person he won't hesitate, even though he'll be called a murderous thug after. And he doesn't walk off saying "I did good" either. He'll question whether he did the right thing or if there was a way to stop said criminal without lethal force. Put Batman in a tough situation and he'll make the hard choice. Then he'll live with the hard choice after.
Supes is mostly presented as how humanity wants to be, Batman is presented how humanity is. Both want to do the right thing and show it can be done. The difference is that Superman makes it look easy while Batman shows just how hard it can be. That's what makes him more relatable.
But that's exactly my point. Superman has to be killed by the "god-beast or whatever" or inconvenienced by kryptonite, there's so little middle ground. A superhero doesn't have to die to be "human or realistic." And, as I said, the getting back up after being beaten makes Batman, at least to me, far more relatable.Agent_Z said:
Hell, two of them are Elseworld comics as well, meaning that they're "what if" scenarios at best. And TDR he sorta knows he's gonna lose so he plans to "die" and screws that up a bit as well.Silvanus said:
Except Bruce has made Wayne Enterprises into a pretty philanthropic endeavor. It runs charities to combat the corruption in the police force and for the families of fallen cops, donates to Arkham for better facilities and doctors, Blackgate for stronger cells, and creates better countermeasures against some of the superpowered beings that call Gotham home. Bruce himself has often dropped the playboy cover to get involved with politics when it will make the city better for a time. He does alot of good for Gotham, but there's something like two hundred years of shit to wipe at.VoidWanderer said:
There's alot of people that don't like what he does, and even more that don't want the status quo to change because they're guaranteed a place for them and their families at the moment, which might not be the case if Gotham was to be more like Metropolis. But there's only ever been a handful of people that are in a position of power who also want things to change for the better at any one time.
In terms of the arguments surrounding how rich and powerful Bruce Wayne is Vs. Clark Kent - Superman... Superman isn't rich? Well then I guess he doesn't want to be. That's it. Everything, absolutely EVERYTHING, is a choice for Superman. And he generally makes what could be termed 'inhuman' choices. This isn't to say he's a monster, quite the contrary. But it's all choice for him. Superman isn't rich because he doesn't care. If he cared he'd be rich. If he cared he'd do or be next to whatever he wanted. If the Earth exploded tomorrow he'd be on Mars the next day doing super stuff there.
We're all used to 'public service superman' but if he ever needed money... what machine couldn't he replace? What conflict couldn't he finish? And all for the highest bidder. 'Mercenary superman' - which is to say, for money rather then whatever - would at least seem remotely human. And not necessarily evil either. Think about it; he's got super speed and strength, he can do a lot in a day all over the world. But, help a forestry op in South America at 9AM or the anti-poaching cause in South Africa at the same time? Cash could be a good way to decide if your ethics or morals weren't up to the task. A normal human might think to make a buck off that ability and just snooze in low Earth orbit to be out of reach when he was having self time, rather then pretend to be someone else entirely. And it would be more human. Enough cash and he could fly some pretty neat shit, himself, into low Earth orbit. Hell, he could be our early space program if he wanted to. How many billions saved in fuel would we willingly give him? And wouldn't doing that, going for that cash, be the more human response to his situation?
Bruce Wayne's rich. He spends his money actively terrorizing the criminal elements of Gotham. He doesn't run his business perfectly, he's no Tony Stark - to put it lightly. In the latest series of movies, by the end of it, he'd let all that slide to a point of almost no return. I don't see Tony Stark doing that. And if Superman were in the same position as Batman was in those movies... there wouldn't have been a story. So for me, Batman wins in the relatable column. When the Earth can explode and all mankind doesn't care because we click our heels together and take the stars - with out any technological assistance at all thanks to the 'whatever chorline' - I'll reassess that position. Until then, human choices face human consequences. Superman choices are... well chosen.
We're all used to 'public service superman' but if he ever needed money... what machine couldn't he replace? What conflict couldn't he finish? And all for the highest bidder. 'Mercenary superman' - which is to say, for money rather then whatever - would at least seem remotely human. And not necessarily evil either. Think about it; he's got super speed and strength, he can do a lot in a day all over the world. But, help a forestry op in South America at 9AM or the anti-poaching cause in South Africa at the same time? Cash could be a good way to decide if your ethics or morals weren't up to the task. A normal human might think to make a buck off that ability and just snooze in low Earth orbit to be out of reach when he was having self time, rather then pretend to be someone else entirely. And it would be more human. Enough cash and he could fly some pretty neat shit, himself, into low Earth orbit. Hell, he could be our early space program if he wanted to. How many billions saved in fuel would we willingly give him? And wouldn't doing that, going for that cash, be the more human response to his situation?
Bruce Wayne's rich. He spends his money actively terrorizing the criminal elements of Gotham. He doesn't run his business perfectly, he's no Tony Stark - to put it lightly. In the latest series of movies, by the end of it, he'd let all that slide to a point of almost no return. I don't see Tony Stark doing that. And if Superman were in the same position as Batman was in those movies... there wouldn't have been a story. So for me, Batman wins in the relatable column. When the Earth can explode and all mankind doesn't care because we click our heels together and take the stars - with out any technological assistance at all thanks to the 'whatever chorline' - I'll reassess that position. Until then, human choices face human consequences. Superman choices are... well chosen.