Posted June 16, 2007 Once again, the power of MSN and the two losers that are me and ViPeR have brought to you this wonderfully engaging and fascinating thread. From the creators of "knock ginger: up or down", this thread promises to be a rollercoaster ride, to the very truth that we all seek for in our lives... Is Batman A SuperHero or not? I say yes, he says no. What do ye think? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 There isn't anything really 'super' about him....except that her rocks. That probably warrents him the prefix 'super' so yes, he is a Superhero! And cos Spawn rocks I had to post this! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 He's not 'technically' a super hero as he has no super abilities or powers. That is indeed why he's so awesome. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 I'd say no, he's more of a vigilante, all be it a very cool one! Whilst he has all these cool gadget like things he doesn't actually have any 'super' powers, just a hell of a lot of money! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 I'd also say no. He's hella cool and hard as nails, but he lacks any 'powers' so how can be be a superhero? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 I was wondering about that myself. I think no. All the superheroes have supernatural powers that allow them to be heroes. Batman on the other hand is a normal being with lots of combat and stealth training and impressive equipment. And I think this is also the reason why he is so popular. He doesn't have any abilities that make him superior and yet he stand up alone against all those loonatics. So in that respect he is more of a hero than all the superheroes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 He's the only comic book character who doesn't suck ass. So No he isn't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 He's the only comic book character who doesn't suck ass. So No he isn't. But then surely he deserves the title "Superhero" more so than them. Well, are there actually rules for what qualifies as a SuperHero? He has special abilities, mostly man-made, but how does that stop him from being any less super? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 But then surely he deserves the title "Superhero" more so than them. Well, are there actually rules for what qualifies as a SuperHero? He has special abilities, mostly man-made, but how does that stop him from being any less super? But if you think about it anybody with enough money could do exactly the same as him and so you could end up with hundreds of so called 'super' heroes! The way I see it you need to have some sort of supernatural ability, something that no one else can do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 But then surely he deserves the title "Superhero" more so than them. Well, are there actually rules for what qualifies as a SuperHero? He has special abilities, mostly man-made, but how does that stop him from being any less super? I think the super term comes from super-natural powers. I mean the X-Men, Spider-Man, Superman, Spawn, Ghost Rider, Hulk all have powers no other humans have. Powers that are part of their bodies, not equipment. But Batman "you are just an ordinary man in a cape! That's why you couldn't fight injustice and that's why you can't stop this train!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 "Hi my name is Bill Gates. With my money I decided to buy shit loads of gadgets and a costume that I got my butler to make. I go around at night with a piss-assed side-kick fighting crime. I'm a damn superhero!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 But if you think about it anybody with enough money could do exactly the same as him and so you could end up with hundreds of so called 'super' heroes! The way I see it you need to have some sort of supernatural ability, something that no one else can do. But, Superman isn't a SuperHero either then, there was a whole planet of him! So, doesn't that throw out the individuality argument? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 But, Superman isn't a SuperHero either then, there was a whole planet of him! But he only got his abilities because of our sun. Under their sun they don't have any special abilities. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 Yeah but Superman is the only one left meaning he is the only one with those powers! Obviously he wouldn't have been a Super Hero on Krypton, but on Earth he most definitely is! You're clutching at straws now Flinky! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 But he only got his abilities because of our sun. Under their sun they don't have any special abilities. But, if you remember in Superman 2, where the Exiles come to Earth, they have the same powers. So, just like the "anyone could get rich and make a suit and fight crime" argument, "anyone from Krypton could have become a hero/villain." RAW: Read above. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 Well, Batman isn't the only one without powers! Iron Man is just a normal guy without his suit. Actually the same goes for loads of others including Venom, The Joker, Doc Ock, Juggernaut, Carnage, Lex Luthor... I could go on. All are classed as 'Super' heroes or 'Super' villians. Yet none of them have powers but are gifted them by their suits (arms and helmet in Doc Ock's and Juggernaut's cases) or have no powers (The Joker and Lex). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 Well, Batman isn't the only one without powers! Iron Man is just a normal guy without his suit. Actually the same goes for loads of others including Venom, The Joker, Doc Ock, Juggernaut, Carnage, Lex Luthor... I could go on. All are classed as 'Super' heroes or 'Super' villians. Yet none of them have powers but are gifted them by their suits (arms and helmet in Doc Ock's and Juggernaut's cases) or have no powers (The Joker and Lex). Lets make love! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 Batman has pretty much the same powers as Spider-Man, the only major difference being that Spidey's origin isn't natural. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 The way I see it you need to have some sort of supernatural ability, something that no one else can do. Exactly. Thank you. I define superheroes as having super natural abilities. It can be argued others are 'super' in comparison to other people maybe. I just feel the term should be reserved for those who have special powers and abilities. It appears this is a draw, from wikipedia; "By most definitions, characters need not have actual superhuman powers to be deemed superheroes, although sometimes terms such as costumed crimefighters[1] are used to refer to those without such powers who have many other common traits of superheroes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 Well, Batman isn't the only one without powers! Iron Man is just a normal guy without his suit. Actually the same goes for loads of others including Venom, The Joker, Doc Ock, Juggernaut, Carnage, Lex Luthor... I could go on. All are classed as 'Super' heroes or 'Super' villians. Yet none of them have powers but are gifted them by their suits (arms and helmet in Doc Ock's and Juggernaut's cases) or have no powers (The Joker and Lex). Very good argument, especially Iron Man. That made me rethink my stance about Batman. I think Batman Begins is quite good to get my point across. In this film he also has lots of unique equipment "all prototypes, none in production". This would bring him to the same level as Iron Man because both have unique equipment that helps them fight criminals. But on the other hand it begs the question: Is Iron-Man a superhero? Furthermore I think a super-villain doesn't necessarily have super-powers but is the enemy of a super-hero which grants him the term super as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 So the real arguement here is whether the naming convention of "Superhero", "super-" and the like are used correctly. Itsn't it? I think the convention has become diluted and confused. To me (using the supernatural ability definition) Batman isn't a Superhero but is a Hero; Joker is just a villain; Venom is a SuperVillain and Spawn is a (wait for it) Super-Anti-Hero. And Iron Man? Well he's just a dick. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 Exactly. Thank you. I define superheroes as having super natural abilities. It can be argued others are 'super' in comparison to other people maybe. I just feel the term should be reserved for those who have special powers and abilities. It appears this is a draw, from wikipedia; "By most definitions, characters need not have actual superhuman powers to be deemed superheroes, although sometimes terms such as costumed crimefighters[1] are used to refer to those without such powers who have many other common traits of superheroes. But the important sentence is "characters need not have actual superhuman powers to be deemed superheroes." I KNEW IT! Again, though, what makes a "hero" differ from a "superhero"? What about a man who rescues somebody from drowning, and in the news the next day is reported as a hero? On this level, Batman isn't just a hero then, is he? Being Batman is Wayne's Second Life. Just like being Spiderman is Parker's second life. So, therefore, I'd count a SuperHero as somebody who...does it often...lol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 The term 'super' just highlights the character from normal people. Batman is a vigilante. And a bit of an emo twonk. Punisher is way better. (I couldn't help it the fanboy in me went off). Oh, and all the gadgets in the world aren't going to help Gates since he doesn't know how to fight. He could, however, bore villains to death with tech talk. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2007 So the real arguement here is whether the naming convention of "Superhero", "super-" and the like are used correctly. Itsn't it? I think the convention has become diluted and confused. To me (using the supernatural ability definition) Batman isn't a Superhero but is a Hero; Joker is just a villain; Venom is a SuperVillain and Spawn is a (wait for it) Super-Anti-Hero. And Iron Man? Well he's just a dick. I think this is basically all it comes down to. The term 'superhero' is really down to personal preference so you can't really win an argument on it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
