₦airaland Forum

All sci find nerds and superhero fans are invited. Drop two fictional characters, pit them against each other, and let's see who will win

TheKingIsHere:
Remember how paid Disney/Marvel critics and bloggers were trying so hard to bring Aquaman down at the box office?

No

IAmSabrina:
https://mobile.twitter.com/_CharlesMurphy/status/1206734377226514432?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1206734377226514432&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2Ftwitter.min.html%231206734377226514432

WANDAVISION SET PHOTOS REVEAL S.W.O.R.D

Hmm, could WandaVision be our first introduction to the MCU incarnation of the Children Of Atom, the Merry Mutants? After all, Wanda is historically a Mutant in the comics(until she wasn’t) and Wanda’s powers and her potential seismic impact her powers can have on reality could in theory be used as a potentially trigger the widespread activation of the X-gene in humans post-Endgame. So instead of Wanda uttering the word, “no more mutants” perhaps the MCU will do the inversion of that and have her say, “more mutants” and through her powers the mutant population starts growing more than ever before.

hulk616:
wikipedia says Dr manhattan killed pandora, metron and owlman. And in the pages of comics that cant be seen.

https://i0.wp.com/thefanboyseo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/RCO018-2.jpg
Read the epilogue of Darkseid War. You'll know better.

The death of Owlman was the 1st tease of Dr Manhattan. Owlman asked the chair what's going on and the chair tells him. Manhattan knew this was happening, teleported there and killed them both.

The tease is the blue glow and the similar exploding blood spatter. Just like when Manhattan killed Rorschach. (If the pics don't show, use the link. Or better yet, google it and educate yourself)

THE DEATH OF RORSCHACH
https://mlpnk72yciwc.i.optimole.com/w:382/h:604/q:auto/https://www.bleedingcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2wipUHO.jpg

hulk616:
wikipedia says Dr manhattan killed pandora, metron and owlman. And in the pages of comics that cant be seen.

THE DEATH OF PANDORA
[img]https://4.bp..com/BKpuOR5sgvw/V0YhV6MrV8I/AAAAAAAAasg/AzTOrjWSAIblwyUdV_ewn99lZ8UWXtQQCLcB/s1600/2016-05.25%2B18.01.03.png[/img]

hulk616:
Superman living in another planet --- in human, someone living in another country
Batman parents killed by a thief -- in human, parents killed by thief and you are trying to make the city a better place
Wonder woman leaving their home, fighting in war and can never go back --- soldiers going for war

AfricaGalactic:
Ask him to define "relatable". Ultimately, i think what is going on here is either
1. He doesn't know the meaning of "relatable".
OR
2. We have different ideas of the word "relatable".
OR
3. He's conflating character traits and plot points with relatability. Which makes no sense.

Follow the rabbit hole!

BTW, LOL @ the people bashing Wikipedia. It's like they forgot that EVERY information that is placed in a wiki page must be traced to a published and authoritative source. Editing wikipedia isn't an easy task. You must have a source. Trust me, I've tried it!

hulk616:
Marvel and DC comics has not dropped in quality

[s]The idea behind the creation of the Golden Age heroes are relatable[/s] LOL WHAT?

OK bro. Shift...

Vic2Ree:
So, in an all-out brawl, you're both saying Marvel will wreck DC?

That's an interesting question

hulk616:
100:1
DC characters and stories are more grounded and more relatable than marvel NOWADAYS.

I like how you said "NOWADAYS" rather than "WHEN THEY WERE FIRST CREATED".

Oga everybody knows that both DC and Marvel have dropped in quality when it comes to comics these days. You've gone off track.

Nairaland is literally the only place online where people think Golden Age heroes were relatable. Lol

pu7pl3:
Dark, brooding, highly Emotional,Moral and a high sense of justice

Batman was not dark and brooding in the 60s up until 1986. The rest have always been a staple of the Batman mythos.

pu7pl3:
The basic character traits have always been the same..simple

List the traits please

Minemrys:
i believe, relatability has to do with going thr0ugh a literary or artistic work and creating a mental picture of it; in this case, actually see a character as an actual being than just an entertainment, propagandist i.e capt america, and plot device i.e the wayne murder. As in, when u read a b0ok, u see an actual face. For example, chike and the river or things fall apart or purple hibiscus. When we read these b0oks we can actually imagine being Chike or imagine a cousin of ours being Kambili or that Uncle of ours who is Ok0nkwo. Watching Sam Raimi's spiderman and even the amazing spiderman, i can see aspects of myself in Peter Parker. And i could see a friend of mine as Harry Osborn. I believe that's what relatability is. That mental picture that's so real. As in, you haven't been to a war before but when s0me0ne who has, describes it to u, it kinda bec0mes real.

Its posts like this that make me wish there was a 100 likes button. Completely agree with your defn

Vic2Ree:
I don't understand number 3. Can you expantiate?

People relate to fictional heroes when they see the hero go through on a daily basis what they themselves go through. Not just a single event. But Every. Single. Day. Just on a larger scale. I'm not saying DC heroes are unrelatable though. That's not my point

pu7pl3:
Wrong!!! Stop reading Wikipedia if you want to know about a comic book character read the actual comics

Batman has always been brutal with anger issues... shooting and killing his enemies with a gun there was nothing happy/or go lucky about batman in the comics...the show you are talking about has nothing to do with the comic books

The more this arguement drags on the more obvious it is that you do not know your so called favourite character

Aren't you tired of your ad nauseum routine? Are you saying the editors of the DC wiki page have no evidence to back up their assertions. Besides, Wikipedia isn't the only place that backs up my assertion. Google it anywhere and you'll see my assertion still stands. If you want sumthin more practical, you can pick up a 60s Batman and an 80s Batman. Then swear they're not different

NeededGist:
That is very rude.

Marvel has always been known to have more relatable Characters, why is this suddenly a problem to you guys here

They think unrelatability =/= uninteresting. I'd say that's faulty logic and insecurity rolled into one, but what do I know.

It is a known fact that Stan Lee and Jack Kirby introduced the first wave of flawed, relatable heroes of the Silver Age under the Marvel Comics banner. This is a known fact everywhere. Except on Nairaland

pu7pl3:
Wth is that @ the bolded its doing you no favours in relation to this arguement

If batman is one of your favourite characters it's a pity you know so little about him then

No. What's pitiful here is that you call yourself a DC fan and you know jackshit about DC's history. Batman hasn't always been the dark, brooding loner you're so used to now. There was a time Batman was as campy as Home Alone. Did you ever watch Adam West Batman? Batman comics in the 60s were modelled after its campy, happy-go-lucky, ridiculous atmosphere. Frank Miller changed that in 1986 with The Dark Knight returns. I can even let the whole "Batman relatability" thing slide. But claiming that Batman never changed character wise since his introduction in 1939 is outright ridiculousness.

Vic2Ree:
Pu7pl3, wait. They are not saying that DC characters are not relatable. They are saying that Marvel were the first to make their characters relatable. It's not hard to grasp, bruh. Come on. Abi, minemrys and africagalactic, correct me if i'm wrong.

Ask him to define "relatable". Ultimately, i think what is going on here is either
1. He doesn't know the meaning of "relatable".
OR
2. We have different ideas of the word "relatable".
OR
3. He's conflating character traits and plot points with relatability. Which makes no sense.

My guess is either 2 or 3.

pu7pl3:
[s]Garbage opinion bruh...pure uneducated garbage[/s]

Lol . I really don't care bro. Can't take you serious. It is clear from my interactions here that you just want to hear yourself talk. I never said Batman and Superman were unrelatable. The way they're being written in comics is different from when they were first introduced. You just want to strawman and make dumb ad absurdum arguments while slyly interjecting ad hominem. Funnily enough Batman is one of my favorite heroes but i don't read him because i can relate to him. Y'all are acting as if being unrelatable means a fella is trash. That's a false equivalence. I simply stated that Marvel introduced the relatable hero trope and no one has disproved it. Instead you just strikethrough my comments like i'm shitting on DC when am really not. In your feelings much?

pu7pl3:
[s]

Struggling with bills and bullies are not the only things that can make a character relatable so don't be naive and act like you only reason linearly

And from your arguements it's obvious you don't even read comics,you just check Wikipedia and blogs and pick whatever point that suits you..talm bout batman changed were you the one that changed him If anything he was even much more relatable back then cos he used to kill and was really vengeful..is that the definition of a perfect man

Batman and superman are Very very relatable and have always been whether you like it or admit it or not it doesn't matter and that's why they are 2 of the most iconic characters ever in comics[/s]

You don't read my posts. Just skim over it to regurgitate the same trash over again. I never said Batman and Superman weren't relatable. And even if, what's the problem with being unrelatable? Stop being so obtuse and immature.

It's funny how people think Batman never changed in characterization. Read some 30s, then 60s Batman comics and then read Frank Miller's run where he basically and entirely revamped the character from scratch. The change in tone and even some character traits is unmistakable. It's not a coincidence that the most iconic Batman stories and moments like Knightfall, Long Halloween, The Killing Joke came around the 70s and up to this day. Unlike Spider-Man where stories like If This Be My Destiny, Spider-Man No More, How Green Was My Goblin came shortly after Spidey's debut.

edit
TLDR: Both Marvel and DC have relatable heroes. However, Marvel was the first to introduce the flawed, relatable heroes. Thus, the term "relatable" is usually affixed to Marvel. DC didn't catch up until later on. With the exception of Captain America, Torch & Namor, Marvel heroes have always been relatable. DC's major heroes on the other hand were always mostly straightlaced in characterization.

Quod Erat Demonstradum.

tuzle:
doom a street leveler, that is an insult to him. Someone who is a candidate for sorcerer supreme and can also make suit as good as Iron Man and the second most brilliant man after Reed Richards in the entire marvel universe a street leveler

Doom is not a street leveler but i understand why some might believe that. Afterall, he's tangled with everyone in the MU from Spider-Man to the Silver Surfer.

pu7pl3:
This isn't a point to Spidey cos if you remove the name Peter/Spiderman from your post people would ask if you were talking about Bruce....cos apart from the being poor part everyother thing you said is exactly the same
1. Being isolated from friends and family/struggling to connect with his own sons(main and adopted)
2. A rouges gallery that always proves to be toomuch hence,Gotham is still a crime infested city despite all his best efforts
3. What he does always end up getting people hurt even when it's obviously not his intentions..etc

and if you think being rich automatically means a character has no problems then I won't bother engaging you on this topic further

Batman: Year One was the comic which introduced most of these points except maybe number 3. When Peter was struggling with rent, bullies, and failing grades in the 60s, Batman comics were in full camp mode. Batman changed whether you like it or not

pu7pl3:
Yea cos a radioactive spider can bite you and give you powers which makes more sense to you?

Bruh go and sleep

Said powers constantly cause him suffering. Enstranging him from friends and family. Said powers can't afford him his rent money. Said powers couldn't save Gwen Stacy. Said powers often feel like a curse. Even with the "powers", he's still a youth struggling with his powers and place in the world. Parker Industries didn't come about via Spider powers. If you read most Spidey comics, you'll notice that the "powers" almost always prove irrelevant when it matters the most. Peter worked hard to earn that status of billionaire industrialist. He's already a genius without his powers.

Fun fact: Spider-Man isn't actually powerful enough to face 75% of the members of his rogues gallery. He always beats the likes of Electro, Carnage and Sandman thru intellect & tech made with the budget of a high schooler. Not raw strength.

Blackspider:
1. It is settled then, DC started the teen teams.

2. America is part of the world, most countries have Spider-Man as more iconic, that is what counts.

3. Good night then

1. Yes i guess it is
2. I said "make a case". Only place that I'm 100% sure Spidey is more popular, is Japan.
3. Good night.

pu7pl3:
You obviously don't know much about Bruce if you think he is that shallow...Revenge doesn't drive him just anger but that's not even beginning to scratch the surface...
Batman is one of the most relatable character in comics cos a real life human being can be batman in real life,no superpowers just your mind and your wealth,you pull it off while making mistakes along the way and making great sacrifices

Yeah. You also need to be the son of a billionaire couple and inherit all their wealth when they kick the rocks

Am just saying. Current Peter Parker's more self made IMO.

God, I need to sleep.

Blackspider:

1. DC have the sovereign seven(1995) predating yours, and even the marvel family.

2. Lol, I won't even argue this one self.

3. Someone that would had explained better.

1. Predating the 60s X-Men? I'll give you the Captain Marvel family though.

2. You shouldn't. Batman is so deeply ingrained in American culture its not even funny. It's the same for Spider-Man but where you can really make a case for him is in the rest of the world. Especially Asia for some reason.

3. OK. I'm even tired sef. Got an early start tomorrow.

pu7pl3:
The topic of relatability stems from how the characters behave Asin their characteristics and traits that make them seem relatable and inspiring to readers...
Now you said the DC characters were evolved so as to become relatable hence implying that they weren't before and that is WRONG!!! The way batman behaved in 1938 is the same way he behaved in 1985 and 2005 till now and it's the same for other heroes too(apart from the ones they changed entirely like blue beetle for example) the characters have always been the same and have always been relatable and inspiring and that's how they gained their "icon" status

Actually Batman (1939) =/= Batman (1966) =/= Frank Miller's Batman.

I don't see how I can relate to Bruce Wayne. Yeah he's driven by revenge and angst. But that's pretty much where his humanity ends for me. Man just seems to perfect for my liking. Maybe you can relate but i can't.

Agree to disagree?

Oh God! Lol!

pu7pl3:
Wrong!!

The characters have always been the way they are character wise

What does this even mean?

Blackspider:
If the legion of superhero are not teen teams, name one marvel teen team that are;

1. Made up of actual teenagers no adult included.

2. No former sidekicks.

3. No affiliation to any major superhero.

Just one marvel team is all I ask.

Do you even know that up untill the early 2000s spiderman was more iconic than batman? Where is XxSabrinaxX so she can tell you more. Do you know how many iconic characters are in the X-Men universe alone? DC only came 3 yrs earlier but that hasn't stopped marvel from having iconic characters. Image comics has only Spawn as their iconic character. That is the true definition of underdogs. Not marvel, they never were.

1. Runaways (2003) would be an answer to your question. The original 60s X-Men lineup would be an answer too.

2. Spider-Man being more iconic than Batman before 2000 is a blatant lie. On par? Yes. But not more than. Look up any "iconic fictional characters" list online.

3. Who is XxSabrinaxX?

BTW Blackspider, I haven't committed any strawman. Based on their initial characterizations, make out a number of A-list heroes from Marvel and DC and see how majority of Marvel's top tier heroes, unlike DC's top tier heroes, were more flawed at the time of their introduction. Case in point: Superman (1938) and Spider-Man (1962). Obviously, you'll see exceptions. But see if you discover a pattern