Worst comic book superfight ever

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Penn Station scan did not have Spidey lifting Penn Station or even remotely near Penn Station. It had him lifting a big chunk of wreckage from when Penn Station done got collapsed, presumably by some big supervillain attack.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=929502#post929502

 

Note -- Andrew claims that 'all of Penn Station' is on his back, but that's not what's shown on the page... especially not given that a) most of the rubble is piled loosely upon the one concrete block, not attached to it and in the second page, the concrete block Spidey is lifting is not only in such close focus that we can't see the top of it any more, but it's /tilted/, so we have /no/ way of knowing how much is still on top, and how much has /slid/ off. (Spidey is tilting it over instead of pressing it straight up for a /reason/, after all. GW Bridge lift, otoh, was a squat press straight up... and not only did we get shown the entire bridge, but the chief engineer on the construction crew is specifically pointing out that Thor is the sole source of support for one end of the entire bridge.)

 

And for that matter, even if we allow in every piece of metal and concrete that we see in the first scan -- "most generous interpretation of artwork", again -- that still ain't anywhere near a sizable fraction of the GW Bridge.

The first panel of the first scan sure does lead me to believe there is a heckuva lot of weight on Spidey's shoulders. As to the bridge vs. being crushed down onto all fours after taking some of the impact of the collapse - I don't think there's much we can judge by to figure out how much greater a feat the bridge was. I can squat a lot more than my bodyweight but I'd have trouble being pressed down in an awkward position from less weight.

 

IOW, you're taking those two panels way to seriously as a way to judge relative super-strength.

 

Another problem with your fixation on proportional strength is that lifting strength isn't the only thing that determines how hard you hit. I'd have to say Spidey's probably got about as good a set of body mechanics as any super for using his strength to its optimum.

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Unless it's Thor 2?

 

Thanks for reminding me. I forgot to add "unless the character is known to be a goober wuss who can believably be having a panic attack even when there's nothing really wrong."

 

Seriously, Eric Masterson, ummm, took a while to remember where he'd left his testicles after putting on the Thor suit. Then again, as you've no doubt guessed, me not exactly impressed with the dude.

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

He can't' date=' but he can deduce from the speed that the roof is collapsing that there's something heavy above it. From his location, he can deduce that it's a train. His Spider-Sense gives a little added credence to his deductions; Spidey knows more about incoming dangers than the average person would.[/quote']

 

The Spidey-Sense lets Spidey know that he is in danger even if his five normal senses give him absolutely no input to let him know that he's in danger. I agree, damn handy ability.

 

OTOH, it don't tell him *what* danger, merely *how much* danger. (edit -- OK, it doesn't *usually* let him know what danger. There have been isolated exceptions. Generally, however, Spidey merely gets 'Spidey-Sense tingling! And it says JUMP!' *bam* 'oh, so that's what it was!')

 

And, well, that much wreckage coming down -- the ol' Danger-Meter is pegging high even if there *aren't* any trains, as that's enough mass to squish people quite handily.

 

As for "can deduce from the speed that the roof is collapsing that there's something heavy above it" -- ummm, Petey's a biochemist, not a civil engineer. He can guess, but his guess is no more likely to be accurate than mine. Now, if Tony Stark were making that guess, I'd believe him -- he knows how to scientifically judge the load-bearing strength of structures just by looking at them and stuff.

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Thanks. I do think it's a rather tiny weight compared to ChuckG's question' date=' but it's very hard to assign any intent one way or the other in terms of the artist/writer. Especially as [b']I generally assume they weren't even considering any real world weights or consequences[/b].

I sincerely doubt any comics writer or artist worries as much about that as gamers do.

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Well' date=' that's what Spidey is guessing, but unless he's borrowed Superman's X-Ray vision, I don't think he can actually *see* through that roof.[/quote']

 

See, Spidey is being used for a bit of exposition - it's a standard literary technique.

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

The Spidey-Sense lets Spidey know that he is in danger even if his five normal senses give him absolutely no input to let him know that he's in danger. I agree, damn handy ability.

 

OTOH, it don't tell him *what* danger, merely *how much* danger. (edit -- OK, it doesn't *usually* let him know what danger. There have been isolated exceptions. Generally, however, Spidey merely gets 'Spidey-Sense tingling! And it says JUMP!' *bam* 'oh, so that's what it was!')

 

And, well, that much wreckage coming down -- the ol' Danger-Meter is pegging high even if there *aren't* any trains, as that's enough mass to squish people quite handily.

 

As for "can deduce from the speed that the roof is collapsing that there's something heavy above it" -- ummm, Petey's a biochemist, not a civil engineer. He can guess, but his guess is no more likely to be accurate than mine. Now, if Tony Stark were making that guess, I'd believe him -- he knows how to scientifically judge the load-bearing strength of structures just by looking at them and stuff.

A scientist is a scientist in comics. Pym was an entomologist who figured out how to make himself shrink and give himself telepathy.

 

Oh yeah, and writers and artists will fudge quite a bit to tell the reader what is going on.

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Stunning and knocking out are two different issues

 

Given that Spidey KTFO'ed Firelord, and people are making some kind of Rhino = Thor = Firelord and/or Spidey = Thor analogy, asking if Thor's ever KTFO'ed Firelord is a legit question.

 

And, as you say, Stunning and KO'ing are two different things, and while Thor's Stunned Firelord once (out of several tries that failed, lifetime), he's never KO'ed the dude.

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Assuming this was a champions fight. Could a martial artist/brick knock out a super energy projector who was stupid enough to get into melee with him without getting hit' date=' but without stunning him.[/quote']

 

And if that "super energy projector" is *also* a Hercules-class brick?

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Given that Spidey KTFO'ed Firelord, and people are making some kind of Rhino = Thor = Firelord and/or Spidey = Thor analogy, asking if Thor's ever KTFO'ed Firelord is a legit question.

 

And, as you say, Stunning and KO'ing are two different things, and while Thor's Stunned Firelord once (out of several tries that failed, lifetime), he's never KO'ed the dude.

Would you please stop mischaracterizing the comparisons being made.

 

The comparisons have been made concerning how hard Spidey hits and how hard a hit Firelord can take.

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

And if that "super energy projector" is *also* a Hercules-class brick?

Herc would eventually take him in a fistfight quite a bit more often than not.

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Hey, remember -- *before* I went off on you, I *asked* you to stop.

 

It was you ignoring that request and piling on the fresh sting of 'humorless! humorless!' that set me off.

 

So next time, when I ask you to stop in such a fashion, consider that a sign that the location known as "my last nerve" is not in fact a step or two in front of you, but is actually where you're standing right at that moment.

 

'Kay?

 

(smiley thrown in to try and show gradually lightening mood and cessation of anger, not to show lack of seriousness... and man, does this text-based interaction have limitations, that I need /paranthetical footnotes/ to communicate distinctions that simple tone of voice would handle IRL.)

That's cool. I either missed the request to stop through thoughlessness (i.e., not realizing it as such) or timing.

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

And could you stop using the crude acronyms?

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

In light of that above, I suppose I should explain more:

 

When analyzing comic books, we have to remember that characters -- like PCs or NPCs in our games -- can only speak from what they know, and not gods'-eye omniscience. (Well, unless they're *supposed* to be gods'-eye omniscient or thereabouts, but Uatu isn't in this scan, so n/m. )

 

For example, in certain Silver Age Batman comics, Batman has said -- repeatedly -- that the Ten-Eyed Man is "the most dangerous man who ever lived!" Taking a 'all dialogue must always be true at all times, no exceptions or circumstances' stance, that would mean that the Ten-Eyed Man really was the most dangerous man who ever lived.

 

Folks, the Ten-Eyed Man was a guy whose sole superpower was that his eyeballs were on his fingertips.

 

Read more if you're curious.

 

And yet, Batman delivered these lines with a straight face. Obviously, if all dialogue spoken at all times was all literally true, comics would make even less sense than they do now.

 

So we have to allow for character ignorance (as well as writers who are obviously on very powerful drugs, but hey, it was 1970, they probably still had a stash left over from the 60s. But enough about the creation of the Ten-Eyed Man.).

 

Statements like 'I can't take much more of this!' or 'I'm getting tired!' are, of course, taken as gospel -- the character in question would obviously know how *he himself* is feeling, after all. OTOH, statements by characters where they guess what's falling on them can be true or not true -- and we don't know which. Unless we know they can actually *see* what's falling on them, and, well, cue lack of x-ray vision above.

 

And no, this is not 'ignoring what's on the page', this is 'not reading any *more* into what's on the page than is actually there.'

 

And what's there is 'Spidey is guessing there are trains falling on him', not 'Spidey knows for sure there are trains falling on him.'

 

There is, as they would say, a reasonable doubt.

 

Hope this helps.

That is a good point.

[Agent X]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

That is a good point.

Sure, in general. I don't think it's so good in the context of those scans we saw.

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

He can't, but he can deduce from the speed that the roof is collapsing that there's something heavy above it. From his location, he can deduce that it's a train. His Spider-Sense gives a little added credence to his deductions; Spidey knows more about incoming dangers than the average person would.

 

Even if there's not a train in it, that much solid concrete makes an impressive strength feat for Spidey.

I think it's reasonable that he could have a solid idea there's "a train(s)" above but to ChuckG's point he wouldn't know how much/how many/etc.. I do think that this is one of those much more vague situations. It doesn't change my feeling on what Spiderman can do in general in the comic book context, but as a literal weight proof it leaves a lot of open questions.

[Snake Gandhi]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

I sincerely doubt any comics writer or artist worries as much about that as gamers do.

You've never argued this stuff with Kurt Busiek.* Trust me, some of them do consider the crazy **** we do.

 

 

(seriously, on that other board, some comic book writers are members, and Mr Busiek pops in from time to time. My fondest memory was arguing Superman vs Thor and having Kurt Busiek pop up on my side:) I was like "Dude! Score!"

 

Heck, Dan Scott recently showed up to defend Squirrel Girl, and Gail Simone is a regular poster, she even has her own section.)

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

I don't think you'll find anyone disagreeing that the Ten-Eyed Man was stupid.

 

 

 

Unless it's Thor 2?

The implication behind your comment is also a good point. The issue is we are always left pretty wide open about the limits of supers. On one hand, their perceptions may be quite off, on another hand, they may have no idea what they're truly capable of.

 

Not a comic book, but in the superhero genre, in Wildcards there was an implication (if not outright statement, it's been a while since I read it) that all power levels were highly variable because in all instances what was really happening was mind over matter. This was said to be particularly true of the Great and Powerful Turtle, who was said to have virtually unlimited power but an inability/innate unwilingness to tap into it, and he even got killed (I think they brought him back but I didn't read those later ones if so). But I remember some generalizations drawn from him in a discussion with the alien.

 

I'm not saying that should justify, say, Spiderman tearing the Earth apart with his bare hands, but I'm saying that this is one of the complications that isn't necessarily an issue of poor writing.

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

The first panel of the first scan sure does lead me to believe there is a heckuva lot of weight on Spidey's shoulders. As to the bridge vs. being crushed down onto all fours after taking some of the impact of the collapse - I don't think there's much we can judge by to figure out how much greater a feat the bridge was. I can squat a lot more than my bodyweight but I'd have trouble being pressed down in an awkward position from less weight.

 

IOW, you're taking those two panels way to seriously as a way to judge relative super-strength.

 

Another problem with your fixation on proportional strength is that lifting strength isn't the only thing that determines how hard you hit. I'd have to say Spidey's probably got about as good a set of body mechanics as any super for using his strength to its optimum.

That I agree whole-heartedly with. In Marvel, heck, comics in general, lift is much more separated from hitting power than in any sort of rationalized system.

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

The Spidey-Sense lets Spidey know that he is in danger even if his five normal senses give him absolutely no input to let him know that he's in danger. I agree, damn handy ability.

 

OTOH, it don't tell him *what* danger, merely *how much* danger. (edit -- OK, it doesn't *usually* let him know what danger. There have been isolated exceptions. Generally, however, Spidey merely gets 'Spidey-Sense tingling! And it says JUMP!' *bam* 'oh, so that's what it was!')

 

And, well, that much wreckage coming down -- the ol' Danger-Meter is pegging high even if there *aren't* any trains, as that's enough mass to squish people quite handily.

 

As for "can deduce from the speed that the roof is collapsing that there's something heavy above it" -- ummm, Petey's a biochemist, not a civil engineer. He can guess, but his guess is no more likely to be accurate than mine. Now, if Tony Stark were making that guess, I'd believe him -- he knows how to scientifically judge the load-bearing strength of structures just by looking at them and stuff.

I would pick a nit here. A lot has been made of Parker's intelligence, and in general in super comics intelligence is quite broadly applied to "SCIENCE!" (if one is a scientist of note) Marvel was better, if memory serves, than DC in this regard, but still it was a trend. So I would say he'd have a halfway decent idea...but ONLY halfway decent. IOW, he wouldn't win the "how many jelly beans in the jar" (or in this case the "how many tons are on me?") contest, but he'd have a general notion more than most.

 

But I still think it'd be a wide lattitude, after all, it's pretty darn hard to get beyond a vague neighborhood if you're under all that weight and you don't really know the limits of your strength (which I really don't think he does).

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

A scientist is a scientist in comics. Pym was an entomologist who figured out how to make himself shrink and give himself telepathy.

 

Oh yeah, and writers and artists will fudge quite a bit to tell the reader what is going on.

Whoops, didn't see your post.

[Inu]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

This is not against you personally, but these kind of statements are beginning to irk me. I throw it in the "Gee, guys, can't we all get along" crowd.

 

Note to lurkers and any others looking down your noses who feel the need to make similar comments:

 

NOBODY IS FORCING YOU TO READ THIS THREAD. SOME GUYS LIKE TO TALK TO PLANTS AND SOME GUYS LIKE TO STUBBORNLY DEBATE ABOUT CERTAIN POINTS BACK AND FORTH. WHOOPDEEDOO. WE AREN'T HURTING ANYONE, WE AREN'T INSULTING EACH OTHER, WE AREN'T STOPPING PEOPLE FROM DISCUSSING OTHER SUPPOSEDLY BAD COMIC FIGHTS. ANY SNOOTY SIDE COMMENTS ARE NOT NECESSARY.

 

We now return you to your regularly schedule debate.

Yes, you're right. I owed the discussion a more serious point rather than a random snipe. I apologise.

 

I guess this is my point: if the discussion were being handled in a calmer fashion, I think it would be a lot more enlightening on both sides. Instead, we have it becoming quite acrimonious, and I feel the point is being lost in many cases. I'm finding many good points being made. It's just a pity that they're being lost amidst vitriol and self-righteous mocking.

 

Not all of them, to be sure. And I don't feel like going through a laundry list. But I think it's that, rather than the argument itself, that is scaring people away. So I guess I'm just asking people to tone it down a little. Argue the points that really matter to you, not the ones that are in front of you. Does the # of punches thing really matter? Do snipes at Chuckg for perceived inconsistency in his ignores really matter? If they do, go ahead. If they don't, well, think about whether you really have to get into it. If you don't have to, then consider moving on to the next point. (Just so I can't be accused of telling people they can't post on something.)

 

As for my own input into the debate, which I will give and then move on to other topics: for me, the debate boils down to one issue. I'm on the 'fight was silly' side, but I do have to admit that Spider-Man has repeatedly shown the kind of strength necessary to do that.

 

HOWEVER, I don't like that. But really, that's a personal problem I have, not an objective one. It's mainly that, anyway. As stated before, Spidey has repeatedly failed to perform at those levels in cases where lives, including his own, were at risk. To me, just like Chuckg, this weakens the character. It makes him less believable to me, and less consistent. It makes me wonder what happened to the super-strength in those scenes. And when we see him out-smarting villains too tough for him to take on directly, it cheapens all that, too, because we know that if things went too tough, he could just pull out 'maximum Spider' and beat the tar outta 'em. And when he does lose? Well, if he loses without going to max power, he's getting robbed, right?

 

This, for me, sounds like bad writing. And so I'd rather ignore things like him KOing Rhino in four punches, or him taking down Firelord. Because without those appearances, Spidey looks to me like a much cooler character.

 

Chuckg seems to be making the argument that they should be ignored for the sake of consistency. I'm not making that argument, though it could be made (but I can see why people reject it). My argument is that Spidey is not a character I find interesting if he has those incredible powers. Not because he's 'too powerful' but because he's so inconsistent with his power level that... well, it gets close to that 'hysterical paralysis' being talked about earlier.

 

And I do realise that consistency is a huge problem in comics. I do realise that writers will have their favorite character win regardless. I do realise that Spidey's the hero, so he'll emerge triumphant. But I do believe that the above are examples of bad writing.

 

And if it doesn't make for a good story, and it cheapens the iconic character being presented, I say 'great fight, great buildup, stupid ending.'

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Given that Spidey KTFO'ed Firelord, and people are making some kind of Rhino = Thor = Firelord and/or Spidey = Thor analogy, asking if Thor's ever KTFO'ed Firelord is a legit question.

 

And, as you say, Stunning and KO'ing are two different things, and while Thor's Stunned Firelord once (out of several tries that failed, lifetime), he's never KO'ed the dude.

Sorry, back in a loop, but it's not like it's that many times at all, and one of those was aborted. The point is we know Thor got damage through and the comparisons all go to using other comics to establish a likelihood that Spiderman could get some damage through as well, though obviously lesser. In fact, I think the point is that Spiderman probably cannot stun Firelord like Thor can.

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Sure' date=' in general. I don't think it's so good in the context of those scans we saw.[/quote']

I think it makes the difference between knowing whether 2 or 20 of course are on him, plus his quote is fairly clearly conjectural. He knows there are trains in Penn Station, he knows what's fallen on him is beyond his expectaiton, and he puts two and two together. But quantity and status of those trains is really unknown. On reflection, we can pretty much trust he's right that there's "trains" on him, but very hard to say what it means in weight or numbers.

 

I think it just means "it's an awful lot of weight"!

[Chuckg]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

Nobody's debating that it's a whole lotta weight, but we need to narrow it down a little finer than that.

 

I might also point out that unless it's an inverted pyramid, the entire mass of the pile is not going to be balancing on one point at the bottom -- i.e., Spidey might be buried under it, but he doesn't have to lift *THE ENTIRE THING* to get out, he merely has to shift the parts that are directly on him to somewhere off of him. (As opposed to Doc Ock's thingy, which actually /was/ an inverted pyramid, kinda. Plus, we got a wide enough shot of that to see that Spidey wasn't just tilting it, but was genuinely pressing it over his head, all four corners well off the floor.)

 

This still requires metahuman strength, obviously -- but Spidey has that. OTOH, it doesn't necessarily require 'I lift zillions of tons!' kinda strength.

[zornwil]

Re: Worst comic book superfight ever

 

You've never argued this stuff with Kurt Busiek.* Trust me, some of them do consider the crazy **** we do.

 

 

(seriously, on that other board, some comic book writers are members, and Mr Busiek pops in from time to time. My fondest memory was arguing Superman vs Thor and having Kurt Busiek pop up on my side:) I was like "Dude! Score!"

 

Heck, Dan Scott recently showed up to defend Squirrel Girl, and Gail Simone is a regular poster, she even has her own section.)

So which was it, Thor or Superman?

 

And was his reasoning, out of curiousity, related to their iconic values or number-crunching?

 

I'm just wondering. In any case, that's pretty neat.

 

Still, I can't see this being habitual in terms of the kinds of long-term consistency and reconciliation people get into. I think they pick a level and go with it, then up it when events accord. Generally, of course, not referring to Busiek or any other specific wrier. I do know a comic illustrator, and no question they can be pretty hardcore geeks (that probably came across wrong...let's just say I didn't mean it in a bad way!).