Dave Galanter
December 1st 1969 - December 12th 2020
He was loved.

Comic Battle >> View Post
Post By

Member Since: Sat Jun 26, 2010
Posts: 1,369
In Reply To

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 12,615
Subj: Re: Whether Superman is above Thor goes without saying
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 at 06:27:57 pm EST (Viewed 182 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Whether Superman is above Thor goes without saying
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 at 04:32:44 pm EST (Viewed 202 times)




    Then answer this question: Can an informed person reasonably and sensibly hold the opinion that Thor should beat Superman a preponderance of the time given the evidence in comic books?

    If the evidence is strong enough, yes. I disagree that the evidence is strong enough.

    Okay, so you do think the majority of the board is unreasonable or uninformed since they frequently rank Thor higher than Superman.

    I disagree with their opinion. If you want to label them as with those adjectives, knock yourself out but I won't.  I am so comfortable with my choice that I have no interest in the labeling anybody anything. Why would you even herd me towards that? The combined Marvel/DC creative and editorial team deemed Superman should win in that story.  Combine with my belief that Superman's history suggests he is at very least as formidable of Thor seals it for me. I can ask you if you think those guys are an unreasonable and uninformed lot, but I won't

    You already answered that they were. Look right above. I asked you if an informed person could reasonably hold the opinion that Thor should beat Superman and you answered no. Therefore, the majority of posters on this board who hold that belief are either uninformed or unreasonable according to your answer. There is no other logical alternative.

Nope, I said I disagree with their interpretation of their information. No I don't think the Thor voters are uninformed, I just think the writers and editors of that story are more informed in comparison. Not interested in putting labels on people as you seem to want me to. 

    But that's just it, if Superman didn't have a history of ridiculous feats that easily equal or even surpass Thor's, I would agree with you. But he does. I also think in that magnitude of an event as Jla/Avengers, those comparative histories were carefully considered by Busiek, Breevoort, Alonzo, Perez and all creative and editorial staff from both sides - and decided that it would make sense for Superman to win.

    Woah, that’s a huge assumption. Far more likely, and something you’ve already admitted to, is the fact that DC would never allow their second most iconic character and hero with the longest history lose.

Huge assumption? Not really.

"The fact is, everyone on the creative team and the edtiorial oversigh at both companies all agreed that it made sense for Superman to beat Thor." - Kurt Busiek



    You wrote, "Why wouldn't BK think it goes without saying Supes should be #1? I would say that's fair based on JLA/Avengers." So you are someone who says it "goes without saying."

    I did not take "goes without saying" as assuming supes winning 100% of the time.  If that is indeed the connotation of the phrase then I agree, it probably doesn't apply. If it means (as I took it) that it means Supes should win most of the time then I don't see anything wrong with it.

    It means neither of those things or at least your second statement does not sufficiently capture what “goes without saying” means. Saying that Superman should be ranked above Thor “goes without saying” means that no other reasonable conclusion can be drawn. It means no one can reasonably believe Thor can be ranked above Superman. It goes without saying that the Earth revolves around the Sun. It goes without saying that Hulk is stronger than Aunt May. Do you really have that degree of inarguable certainty that Superman should beat/is more powerful than Thor?

Very well, if that's the definition of the phrase "without saying", then and if BK meant it to be that way, then I don't agree. I've been very clear to say I think Superman should mean more often than not, not 100%.


    Really? You think they are exactly equal? Not counting villains who are primarily Avengers or Justice League foes, Thor's rogue's gallery is comprised of the Absorbing Man, Celestials, Demogorge, the Destroyer, Ego the Living Planet, Galactus, Hela, Karnilla, Kurse, Loki, Mangog, Mephisto, the Midgard Serpent, Pluto, Perrikus, Surtur, and Ymir. Superman's most formidable foes are Bizarro, Brainiac, Cyborg Superman, Darkseid, Doomsday, General Zod, Gog, Kalibak, Lex Luthor, Mongul, Mr. Mxyzptlk, and Superboy Prime. Are you really going to tell me that those two lists are exactly equal in power level?

    Are you saying histories and rogues galleries are the same thing?

    Not exactly, but they are highly correlated. Thor faces cosmic/planetary threats more often than Superman in solo stories.

So does it mean Superman wouldn't be able to beat Thor's rogues given the chance? I'd like to see proof that he wouldn't be able to.

    That is no doubt  one of the reasons why the writing and editorial
    teams of both sides decided that Superman. would win. I mean, it has to be. It wouldn't make sense otherwise.

    You need to work harder on that imagination. As if both writing and editorial teams sat down and tabulated both characters’ long histories of wins and losses and debated this like sports writers. As if either Marvel or DC cared nearly as much about continuity as fans do. The outcome makes perfect sense if DC editorial took the absolute position that their most powerful hero Superman can’t lose and there would be no comic if he was going to be written to lose. As Vidar already pointed out, Superman is far more important to DC than Thor is to Marvel.

Again, it cuts both ways. Superman didn't speed-blitz Thor or use Torquasm Vo. It's not "wild assumption" at all. I do agree that the story called for Superman to win because as I have posted above, the writing and editorial staff meant Superman to win. That is the simplest and and most logical conclusion to have.

There very well may be a political aspect to it but  I haven't seen any editorial comments anywhere saying as such. Even if there were, I doubt it is the only impetus to have all parties agree to have Superman win. Why not have a draw? Batman and Cap had one after all. And you want me to use, imagination eh? Kinda imagine what they were talking about in those editorial sessions? Am I to imagine that those Marvel and DC staffs are um, uninformed and unreasonable? Naah.



    Remember, JLA/Avengers was a limited series with a multitude of heroes. Even if the actual fight scenes were limited in number, I think it's fair to assume the writer meant to convey that both heroes were fighting to their best abilities given the stakes. That would make more sense than otherwise.

    You know the other clear win in that issue of Avengers/JLA is Iron Man and
    Hawkeye beating Captain Atom and Green Arrow. Given that Hawkeye and Green Arrow are pretty even, are we then to take this issue as overwhelming evidence that Iron Man is superior to Captain Atom?

    Which issue did this happen from the 4 issues. I'd like to check.

    Avengers/JLA #2.

So Ironman and Hawkeye beat Caption Atom and GA duo vs duo. Do you think there was any oh, I don't know...teamwork at all? Like a sudden crossmatch to confuse the other duo and gain an advantage? This is not like the Superman Thor match, where they went at it mano a mano. Until after Supes won and other Avengers dogpiled Supes of course.

From his Formspring page.
Tom, who's more powerful: Galactus or a Celestial? I'd put my money on Galactus over any single Celestial.
Posted with Google Chrome 55.0.2883.87 on Windows 7
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2021 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2021 Powermad Software