Discussion in 'Fight Club' started by Themanofbat, May 29, 2012.
We've got a whole forum for versus threads these days.
Pfft. No contest kids. The adolescent sidekick-level punk with puberty issues against the greatest detective in the world?
Nope, the only thing I'll give ol' Webhead is an under-dog potential. And Batman's already got him beat there with not having any powers :yawn:
Jokes aside, film-verse Bats pretty much talks against the kind of personal-vendetta driven crusade that Pete's on, he's up there changing the course of the city with the mayors, commissioners, and D.A.s and fighting terrorists and dictators. Spidey's a teenager with a lot of power that often overwhelms him, his heart for being responsible is noble, yes, but he's still inexperienced next to Batman, especially at this game of urban superheroing.Plus, Batman's gadgets out-moneys Spidey's any day. Even on a physical contest, Batman would out-think the kid and put him down for the count. It isn't because "Batman always wins" -- he's taken down superpowered villains a lot, and if you include Killer Croc, movie-Bats has that cred as well. Bat-sonar can go toe-to-toe with Spidey-sense for awareness, but Bats would avoid a direct contest of agility or strength, and if it's mechanical web-shooters he'd either tally the fight long enough for spidey to run out or dismantle the gadget by getting close. With webbing gone, he'd force Spidey to an open area (where the agility becomes moot) gas him with a pellet when he's close. He's the Batman. He thinks before he thumps.
Actually, depending on who's writing this fight, Batman could very well bang Mary Jane, Betty Brandt and Aunt May during the course of it.
^ good point. And all at the same time as well.
Well, Spidey's got the whole "with great power comes great responsibility" thing, and with Batman it's simply "I won't kill you but I don't have to save you."
I'd say the dark knight pawns the wall-crawler when it comes to being brutal.
Actually, Spider-Man has a new thing "As long as I'm around, no one dies." which is in direct opposition to Batman's I don't have to save you thing.
That's rather interesting.
Isn't it the same thing though? With his responsibility angle I mean. But yeah I agree it's in direct opposition to Bale-Bats' burly boast.
not to bring this up again but (well yeah to bring this up again) -- i'm curious, if Pete's going for the "with great power comes great responsibility" shouldn't it mean that if the conditions are right he'd feel that it's his "responsibility" to kill ? I think he's faced that dilemma with Gobby before but I can't place it. It had to be around the John Romita Jr. years... I think.
At any rate, Batman isn't that dogmatic about his heroism. He has a "no kill" policy but it isn't the Gospel to him, and that's something we saw at the end of BB when he interprets his policy to fit his needs. He isn't inclined to save anyone, nor is he taking responsibility for other people's actions. Pete's got some learnin to do.