Is Captain America Marvel's Batman?

[TheCorpulent1]

Aristotle filters everything through his "Marvel sucks at everything" lenses.

 

[Aristotle]

I don't see any of that

Batman R.I.P. is pretty obviously not going to kill Batman, and therefore not going to have his sidekick take over for him. It's a pretty clear counter-argument. Final Crisis is the culmination of the last few years of DC's Silver Age kick, which is diametrically opposed to the style of Marvel comics, which has grown progressively darker, grimmer, and grittier for 40 years. And Rucka's Checkmate ended with a demonstration of how well superheroes could work with the government without having to sacrifice everything that makes them superheroes (i.e., a refutation of Civil War.)

 

[The Major]

Aristotle filters everything through his "Marvel sucks at everything" lenses.

That's to bad. He's missing a lot of great stuff Marvel's publishing these days.

And Rucka's Checkmate ended with a demonstration of how well superheroes could work with the government without having to sacrifice everything that makes them superheroes (i.e., a refutation of Civil War.)

The Iniative was never meant to function properly. IIRC it's meant to be a meta-texual middle finger to the Bush administration.

In Marvel almost everything the Iniative does is a huge screw up.

 

[Aristotle]

Aristotle filters everything through his "Marvel sucks at everything" lenses.

I'm getting tired of hearing this. No, I don't like Marvel as much as I like DC. And I don't like Joe Q. And I don't like the general tone of the Marvel U. That doesn't mean I hate Marvel, or that I think Marvel sucks at everything. I read plenty of Marvel.

 

[Aristotle]

That's to bad. He's missing a lot of great stuff Marvel's publishing these days.

Sure, except for Captain Britain, Last Defenders, almost every X-book, Captain America, all three Avengers books, New Warriors, Secret Invasion, Hulk, and several others.

 

[The Major]

Aristotle:

My mistake.

What titles do you collect from Marvel that you like?

 

[Kitsune]

I'm getting tired of hearing this. No, I don't like Marvel as much as I like DC. And I don't like Joe Q. And I don't like the general tone of the Marvel U. That doesn't mean I hate Marvel, or that I think Marvel sucks at everything. I read plenty of Marvel.

Yeah, it's not like you bring up how much you hate marvel at every opportunity, or call Stan Lee a hack when it's not really even pertinent to the conversation at hand. I don't see how anyone could get the idea that you hate Marvel.

 

[Aristotle]

Major: See above.

 

[Aristotle]

The Iniative was never meant to function properly. IIRC it's meant to be a meta-texual middle finger to the Bush administration.

In Marvel almost everything the Iniative does is a huge screw up.

Yes, and Rucka refuted that idea by showing that there's really no reason that the Initiative should work poorly.

Yeah, it's not like you bring up how much you hate marvel at every opportunity, or call Stan Lee a hack when it's not really even pertinent to the conversation at hand. I don't see how anyone could get the idea that you hate Marvel.

Do I criticize Marvel? Yes, I do. If you'd stop trying to find reasons to dislike me, you'd notice that I criticize what I don't like about DC too. Can I help it if DC doesn't piss me off nearly as often, or nearly as intensely, as Marvel does? And yes, I despise Stan Lee. That doesn't mean I hate Marvel. It does mean I hate anything Stan Lee wrote, because he's a ****ty hack writer who rode Kirby's artistic skill and his own corporate prostitution to fame.

There was a time, in the not too distant past, that I wasn't reading a single Marvel book aside from Ghost Rider and Captain America, and I frequently expressed the opinion that I hated Marvel. I've spent the last few months explaining that my opinion has changed. Everyone seems much more interested in continuing to pigeonhole me than in viewing reality.

 

[The Major]

Yes, and Rucka refuted that idea by showing that there's really no reason that the Initiative should work poorly.

I actually like the premise of the Initaive.

It's not perfect, of course. But I think it makes more sense if Marvel is trying to be more realistic and the super-heroes need some accountability for when they do make huge mistakes or go rogue.

 

[Aristotle]

Realism in superhero comics is ********. It's a sham, a front for post-modern deconstruction and gray morality. You can't have realism. It's surreal by definition. The only real effects of the "realism" trend have been darker morality and deconstruction, which is far beyond overplayed by this point.

 

[The Major]

Aristotle:

Of course it is.

Still, it's just what Marvel wants their current comics to be like right now.

 

[Hans]

Realism in superhero comics is ********. It's a sham, a front for post-modern deconstruction and gray morality. You can't have realism. It's surreal by definition. The only real effects of the "realism" trend have been darker morality and deconstruction, which is far beyond overplayed by this point.

That's asinine. You can certainly have realism in comics. You can have realism in anything without it being a "front for post-modern deconstruction and gray morality." By the simple definition of the word "realistic," you're completely wrong.

 

[Raiden]

Realism in superhero comics is ********. It's a sham, a front for post-modern deconstruction and gray morality. You can't have realism. It's surreal by definition. The only real effects of the "realism" trend have been darker morality and deconstruction, which is far beyond overplayed by this point.

I think comics are a reflection of the time that they were published, and right now people want realism as opposed to surrealism. Look at the success of the superhero movies right now: Nolan's BB and TDK emphasized on realism, Favearu's Iron Man also makes it look like science as opposed to fantasy when Stark constructed his suit. X-Men (during the Singer era) strived to explain mutants and ditched the spandex. I think realism in comics can draw in more readers now because people are more jaded and they don't really buy into the fantasy elements as much as before. If it can make people feel more connected to the superheroes they read, then it's not a bad thing.

 

[Kitsune]

The premise behind superheroes is not realistic, but that doesn't mean that the personal interactions between characters has to be unrealistic too.

 

[Kitsune]

How the heck did I double post this? Stupid lagging server.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I think comics are a reflection of the time that they were published, and right now people want realism as opposed to surrealism. Look at the success of the superhero movies right now: Nolan's BB and TDK emphasized on realism, Favearu's Iron Man also makes it look like science as opposed to fantasy when Stark constructed his suit. X-Men (during the Singer era) strived to explain mutants and ditched the spandex. I think realism in comics can draw in more readers now because people are more jaded and they don't really buy into the fantasy elements as much as before. If it can make people feel more connected to the superheroes they read, then it's not a bad thing.

Favreau's Iron Man seemed decidedly unrealistic to me. It's very much fantasy-driven in the sense of classic comics: one man can defy the system and make a difference. If Tony Stark came back from Afghanistan and said he was totally changing the direction of his company away from everything that's proven profitable, his board of shareholders would've canned his ass so fast it would've made his head spin, and he would've been one man trying to make a difference broke and alone on the street.

I'm getting tired of hearing this. No, I don't like Marvel as much as I like DC. And I don't like Joe Q. And I don't like the general tone of the Marvel U. That doesn't mean I hate Marvel, or that I think Marvel sucks at everything. I read plenty of Marvel.

Geez, take it easy. It was just a joke. I don't agree with your analysis of Batman RIP, but I know you don't vehemently hate everything Marvel does.

 

[CaptainCanada]

Favreau's Iron Man seemed decidedly unrealistic to me. It's very much fantasy-driven in the sense of classic comics: one man can defy the system and make a difference. If Tony Stark came back from Afghanistan and said he was totally changing the direction of his company away from everything that's proven profitable, his board of shareholders would've canned his ass so fast it would've made his head spin, and he would've been one man trying to make a difference broke and alone on the street.

That's not really the kind of realism, so much as, like BB, the movie strives to (and succeeds, I think) convey the idea that someone could actually be a superhero in the way Batman/Iron Man is (though they, of course, could not).

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I tend to forget that sort of "realism" right off the bat. It's patently ridiculous that Batman or Iron Man could really do what they're shown doing in the movies--hence all the CGI. Every superhero requires some level of suspension of disbelief on that front.

 

[Raiden]

I tend to forget that sort of "realism" right off the bat. It's patently ridiculous that Batman or Iron Man could really do what they're shown doing in the movies--hence all the CGI. Every superhero requires some level of suspension of disbelief on that front.

While it's true that we could never achieve the kind of technology that Batman and Iron Man use to fight crimes, both Nolan and Favearu strived for realism that made the moviegoers at least be willing to suspend their belief and accept the world that these movies established. This is why both BB and IM have scenes where Wayne test out the gadgets and vehicles supplied by Wayne Enterprise, and Stark doing test sequences to see if his flight stablizer work. I think these scenes are what make them being able to bridge the gap between fantasy and reality.

 

[kguillou]

But the thing with marvel is that most of their characters have at least semi-realistic origins. Take Spider man for example, even though of course it could never happen, but is it that far fetched to believe that if someone gets bitten by a radioactive spider then their DNA would be changed from human to insect? I mean, in real life, freak accidents happen all the time, and maybe just maybe someone bitten by a radioactive spider would absorb the radiation rather than die from it. Ah if only....

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Eh, I don't know if you meant to draw a contrast between Marvel and DC in that respect, but DC has plenty of origins that are just as realistic. Actually, Spider-Man's basic origin happened to the Flash, only it was chemicals and lightning rather than an irradiated spider bite. In the case of Green Lantern, Hal didn't even have to do anything; an alien just dropped out of the sky and gave him his powers.

 

[topdog1]

I just watched Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked on the History Channel. One expert there made the perfect point that still holds true. When you're a small child, you read DC. When you get a little older and your adult sensibilities kick in, you graduate to Marvel.

Batman may try to hold the older pallet but Marvel is just more complex and more interesting. Most readers realize that Marvel in general is like watching Major League Baseball while DC is like watching AAA Baseball. Same concept but a world of difference.

Back on topic, Daredevil had always been accused of being "Marvel's version of Batman," but who could've guessed DD would be better at it? Gadgets aside, Daredevil is really kind of what Batman should be stripped of the kid side kicks and massive components based on toys and franchise baggage. Christopher Nolan is kind of getting it right on film.

 

[venom892]

Oh boy here we go with the maturity debate with DC and marvel.I doubt a kid would enjoy Superboy prime ripping people in half.Also if we graduated from a comic to the next due to maturity then we all only read Veritgo and no superheroes.Jesus that argument was only good in the sixties.DC was even the first Comic book company to deal with drug abuse{Green arrow's sidekick roy}.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

It'd be a wonderful world if we never heard the argument "DC is _____ while Marvel is ______" again, but it'll never happen.