Super Fight!

[Hammerskjold]

(the extended edition is worse than the theatrical release for this.)

?! Damn, I've seen the theatrical release version, but haven't seen the extended. I was really hoping they added some parts that I felt needed adding, but if its just more of Snyder's slow mo action scene, I'm kinda dissapointed.

On the whole, it was a remarkable attempt to film the almost unfilmable, and ranks as one of the all-time best superhero movies. (Admittedly, this is a genre that has only blossomed very recently, except for a few classics like the original Superman.)

While I did enjoy it, and I'd certainly classify it as good-very good on it's own. If we're talking about superhero genre in general I still think 'Unbreakable' and 'The Incredibles' are one of the best examples of movies that really 'gets' the superhero myth. The guy who played Rorsharch pretty much nailed the character though, at least IMO. (Though yes, I still catch Superman-1 if it's on TV or something.)

As to the "you know what", I'm afraid I don't know what. What?

You mentioned it, the different version of the ending. Though I prefer the comic \original version too, I can sorta see Snyder's reasoning. (viewers who didn't read the comic might see the calamari as being too ridicilous, or it simply might not work on screen)

But for me at least, it changes it's ramification. IIRC,in the comics version my take is they already pretty much solved the energy crisis (the spark hydrant doesn't seem to operate like a gas station, maybe it's subsidized in a different way but I don't remember anybody depositing money directly to plug in their electric cars. They just show them plugging it in. Personally I like this a bit more, because it seems to be saying to me that despite the advanced technology Manhattan brings about, the problems of\caused by human nature is still the same. The movie version doesn't quite gel the same way for me. But that might just be my interpretation of it.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Batman? Superman? Bah.

Thor!

If you've got a big enough hammer, everything *is* a nail.

;)

--Pete

[Chesspiece_face]

A couple Robins/Batgirls, a butler, and a police force. Against *superman*. Seriously? That's Batman's clutch advantage? Superman could liquify the lot of them and be home before he left. That's not an army, it's a handful of friends.

Now, start divvying up the JLA, and you might get some allies worth having. But that would kind of defeat the whole "X vs. Y" thing.

-Jester

Superman "could" liquify them. The argument here isn't who has the stronger powers, that's obvious. The question is who would win in a drop down fight. And to answer that you have to look at the characters. Superman could liquify a whole city, but he never would. There's a great quote in Superman/Batman (issue 3 maybe?) where Superman is unleashing fury and Batman thinks something along the lines of "Anyone looking at Clark at times like this would have to see him as a god. It's a good thing for all of us that he doesn't see himself this way." There's also a great quote from Superman in the early Morrison JLA where after the whole JLA including Superman is beaten and imprisoned Batman comes through a whole super team to rescue them. Superman mentions that "Batman is the most dangerous person in the world." And Superman is right. Batman has not only defeated Superman he has defeated New Gods in the DC universe.

Superman can't beat Batman, not because he lacks the power to do so, but because he would always hold back. It's part of the pathos of the character. He has all that power and all he wants to do is fit in. He respects humanity too much to go around vaporizing people that get in his way. Batman on the other hand, comes from the other side of the tracks. He has no powers, and he has seen the lengths to which evil will go. Given the opportunity Batman would never hold back. He nearly crushed the life out of Supes in The Dark Knight Returns to achieve his goal and in Hush after tricking a Poison Ivy seduced Superman into electricuting himself with the whole Metropolis power grid he had Catwoman go drop Lois Lane off a building forcing Superman to choose between continuing the fight or being the good man Superman is and rescuing the damsel in distress.

So the question isn't "WCSD? What could Superman do?" it's "WWSD? What would Superman do?" And has been shown repeatedly even though Superman has all those powers he doesn't use them lightly. Not only that but near invulnerability leaves him somewhat cocky and he never really takes heart of his own weaknesses until it's too late.

[eppie]

@all

let's not nerdify the lounge.

I am getting the same feeling as when colleagues or classmates were starting to tell chemistry jokes.

[Kevin]

@all

let's not nerdify the lounge.

I am getting the same feeling as when colleagues or classmates were starting to tell chemistry jokes.

*snarf*

Don't nerdify a video game forum!

Thank you for the wonderful laugh this morning. And if you were serious, thanks for the even bigger laugh. :)

[Tal]

Even Superman has to recharge sometime, he's solar powered remember. So I wouldn't entirely agree that he can't be worn out, or drain his resources. It might take a while yes. But how long can Clark keep up with the vigilance bordering on paranoia? Bats pretty much had practiced that kind of mindset ever since he was 8-10.

Everything I've read recently shows that Superman is getting more powerful due to his constant exposure to Earth's Sun. This seems to have accelerated since his "death" at the hands of Doomsday. Batman wouldn't be able to wear down Superman and having been the victim of a similar tactic at the hands of Bane it would be highly unlikely he would resort to such a tactic.

Relatively recent events in Justice League of America (I no longer have direct access to the DC Archives or I would pull up the issue number) revealed that Batman keeps extensive files on how to eliminate every hero and villain on Earth. The first he created and works most often on is Superman. Unless Superman gets the drop its unlikely that he would defeat Batman.

[Tal]

I got into a minor arguement with a co-worker today over who would win in a fight:
Batman or Superman
I took the side of :ph34r:Batman:shuriken:
He went with "Superman pick up big rock, make Batman paste"

I got him to budge on a few points, but he still insists that it "wouldn't even be a contest"

What do you guys think?

Query - Bruce Wayne Batman or Dick Grayson Batman?

/nerd

[Zingydex]

Everything I've read recently shows that Superman is getting more powerful due to his constant exposure to Earth's Sun. This seems to have accelerated since his "death" at the hands of Doomsday. Batman wouldn't be able to wear down Superman and having been the victim of a similar tactic at the hands of Bane it would be highly unlikely he would resort to such a tactic.

Given what I know of Bats, I think having firsthand experience with the power of attrition would make him *more* likely to use it against an opponent, given the means to do so.

Supes versus Bats, as pointed out by Chesspiece, has more to do with psychology than powers. Superman has a thousand ways he could reduce Batman or any other human to a stain on the floor. But he's too much of a pansy to do it. Heck, I've got an old comic where it takes the better part of a page for the Phantom Stranger to convince Supes to throw a punch at an animated pile of *dirt* because it's powered by the souls of dead criminals. And this while said mound is getting bigger by the minute and threatening to crush Metropolis.

The Bat, on the other hand, is ruthless. He has to be in order to be effective in a crime-ridden rathole like Gotham. He'll resort to anything, up to and including self-destruction if need be, to get the job done.

[Tal]

Given what I know of Bats, I think having firsthand experience with the power of attrition would make him *more* likely to use it against an opponent, given the means to do so.

Thats the thing - given Superman's incredible stamina and accelerated recharge there is likely very little in Batman's arsenal that could put a dent into it. I would expect Batman to figure some means of stripping Superman of his powers.

[Lissa]

Query - Bruce Wayne Batman or Dick Grayson Batman?

/nerd

Bruce of course.

[Lissa]

The defense for Batman seems to revolve around some version of "Batman is a complete badass, and Superman isn't."

If you think badassedness beats the absurd set of powers Superman has, then there you go. But I'm having a hard time thinking of an actual method by which, in anything resembling a fair fight (where both know they're fighting each other from the beginning), Batman is going to so much as leave a dent in Superman. Since Superman understands that his opponent is not a complete moron, and may well be equipped with Kryptonite, one would assume he would take up his "can't lose" tactic of vaporizing Batman with heat vision from hundreds of feet in the air. I'm not quite sure how you beat that, especially since he can dodge projectiles at light speed.

But, then, I'm not Batman.

-Jester

Afterthought: Superman does seem to have a shockingly difficult time beating Lex Luthor, who is, if anything, less dangerous than Batman.

After-afterthought: He does always win in the end, though.

Consider this, Batman is the only non-superpowered member of the Justice League, that says something right there. Also, Batman has devised a contingency for any and all JL members that could go rogue and how to deal with them, permanently if need be.

There has even been a quote in the DC universe attributed to Superman saying something to the effect that Batman is the most dangerous individual on Earth. Superman has even gone so far as to give Batman some Kryptonite to deal with him if he goes rogue.

[Lissa]

Thats the thing - given Superman's incredible stamina and accelerated recharge there is likely very little in Batman's arsenal that could put a dent into it. I would expect Batman to figure some means of stripping Superman of his powers.

Batman has kryptonite that was given to him by Superman incase Superman goes rogue. Nothing stops Superman quicker than that.

In the Dark Knight series done by Frank Miller, Batman builds kryptonite into his suit which disables Superman.

[Lissa]

@all

let's not nerdify the lounge.

I am getting the same feeling as when colleagues or classmates were starting to tell chemistry jokes.

Do you even realize what the lounge is about?! This is a nerd haven for godsakes!

[Jester]

Consider this, Batman is the only non-superpowered member of the Justice League, that says something right there. Also, Batman has devised a contingency for any and all JL members that could go rogue and how to deal with them, permanently if need be.

There has even been a quote in the DC universe attributed to Superman saying something to the effect that Batman is the most dangerous individual on Earth. Superman has even gone so far as to give Batman some Kryptonite to deal with him if he goes rogue.

But... if the argument is that Superman would lose against Batman because he's just such an old softie that he'd lose to someone several orders of magnitude less powerful (who is also a badass), then why would "rogue" Superman subscribe to the same crippling moral code? Wouldn't he be the kind of jerk who vaporizes people from a mile away using heat vision and light speed? Wouldn't he be the guy who hurls an asteroid at Batman at near-light speeds, regardless of the collateral damage? Or is rogue Superman the worst of both worlds - amoral enough to betray the JLA, but still a total chump who won't take one of the thousand obvious Batman-annihilating tactics available to him?

I mean, having a plan is great and all, but if I recall correctly, Germany had a plan to win WWI. A good plan is an advantage, but it certainly isn't an automatic win against a vastly more powerful opponent - even if you are Batman.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

let's not nerdify the lounge. I am getting the same feeling as when colleagues or classmates were starting to tell chemistry jokes.

Batman and Robin were working late one night in the Bat cave creating the antidote for some diabolical nerve agent, when Robin suddenly interrupted their work balancing a chemical equation, saying, "Remember Batman, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate!"

[aaa]

Bah.
Thor!

HEY NOW! Let's keep it PC!
Err, I mean, let's keep it DC.

Besides, IronMan could kick blondie's @$$.
IronMan is the Batman of Marvel.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Err, I mean, let's keep it DC.

When I was young I read Dullard Comics for a while -- but I outgrew them and quit reading comics until the Marvel of mature stories and art work pull me back years later. :P

EDIT: To clarify, I quit reading comics about '56. Back then, comics were pretty lame. Then about ten years later, I read the 'new' Marvel comics and they were a lot better, but I eventually got bored with them also. Too repetitive.

--Pete

[Jester]

Nothing says "Immature, predictable pablum" quite like DC.

-Jester

[DeeBye]

Batman? Superman? Bah.

Thor!

I bought my son the Hulk VS DVD this year, and they are really, really good. Thor did not fare too well versus the Hulk, and nor did Wolverine. Both movies had Hulk tearing stuff up and Thor and Wolverine scrambling to find a way to revert him back to Banner to defeat and/or contain him.

For pure brute power, I think Hulk has every comic book character beaten soundly. His simplistic mind is his weakness. And what a weakness it is!

[--Pete]

Hi,

Nothing says "Immature, predictable pablum" quite like DC.

Nothing says "Immature, predictable pablum" quite like CCA.

--Pete