Quote:Three different, pro-Superman writers. If I were writing a conflict between fictional characters, of which I had an obvious bias towards one, and if I were allowed, then I too would write my favored character to be superior to the other. Additionally, your examples aren't as irrefutable as you like, because Superman has been punked by far less than Kalibak, Thor, etc. as well throughout his published history. Ergo, nothing you have posted thus far is irrefutable proof of Superman's superiority.
So all three are biased towards Superman despite Jurgens saying Thor will beat Superman?
Seems like a lot of excuses to me.
Quote:Now I do regard Superman as physically superior to Thor - perhaps not by the margin you do, but superior nonetheless. What I take umbrage to is your unequivocal declaration that Superman is simply superior to Thor. Thor is a physical being imbued with divine magic. In fact, much of his arsenal relies on that very magic. Superman had his clock cleaned by Captain Marvel, who stated that he was able to do so because of Superman's vulnerability to magic. Thor should be able to replicate said feat by virtue of who he is. In other words, Thor has a distinct advantage in at least one aspect, and his martial prowess should provide him with another. The writers you cite as your proof to the contrary don't seem overly interested in the big picture, and unless I'm mistaken, it seems neither do you.
Cap has never beaten Superman much less cleaned his clock. And if Thor beats Superman due to magic weakness, it'd be due to Superman's own vulnerability not due to Thor's powers.
I think Thor should beat the Hulk more often then not. The Hulk remains my favorite character, and yet if "I" were to write a battle between the two, I would pen it simply as a mano a mano affair, in which the Hulk in my opinion would have a distinct advantage. Jurgen's comments are empty when he doesn't back them up. Label it as "excuses" if you want, as I am not remotely interested in changing your mind on the matter at hand. To me however, it is very clearly bias in favor of Superman, especially when he follows up his comments by stating he feels Superman is "far" more powerful.
Regarding your comments on whether it is Superman's vulnerabilities or Thor's powers that would allow the latter to win, let me ask you this. In the Kingdom Come series, Superman cuts himself with Hephaestus' sword, with Wonder Woman cautioning him on its magical nature. Could Batman, while wielding said sword, injure Superman? Or does one need a measure of superpower to cause Superman harm, even when armed with a magical weapon? If your answer is "yes" that some measure of super power is needed to inflict injury, than it is reasonable to say that Thor's power does have some impact on the outcome, just as the Silver Surfer's ability to produce kryptonite or replicate radiation of a red star would have to be considered as important as Superman's inherent weakness to same should those two battle. Once again, I do feel that Superman is generally written as more powerful than Thor, but I don't consider him to be a superior character, as Thor has abilities that target a specific weakness of Superman.
While it is interesting to debate my opinions on Character A versus Character B with others, I do feel that a character's stature within their respective universes heavily impact their performances in company crossovers. It's fallacious to suggest otherwise. In my opinion, the simpler truth to all this is that Superman has always been far more important financially to DC than Thor is to Marvel, and so I doubt DC would agree to let one of their top two cash cows play second fiddle to anyone at Marvel, even if it were sensible. Hell, even Batman managed a win over the Hulk for Pete's sake, a battle that should have had Bruce Wayne turned into guano in about 2 seconds time. Quite frankly, I am amazed--nay, flabbergasted--that DC allowed Venom to fare as well as he did against Kal El, but I chalk it up to Venom being at the height of his popularity, whereas (IIRC) Superman titles were at one of their lowest ebbs in terms of sales.
- Superman vs Thor: Comparison · abhijit · Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 10:03:50 pm CST
- Re: All I know is that this never happened to Thor! · zvelf · Thu Feb 09, 2017 at 10:08:25 pm CST
- So much discussion. BUT the results are: Superman 1, Thor 0. (no text) · Bk Ray · Wed Feb 08, 2017 at 04:50:12 pm CST
- Wow. Does Superman/Hulk and Thor/Hulk also generate this much discussion? (no text) · UName · Mon Feb 06, 2017 at 01:45:57 pm CST
- similar things have been said about Gladiator... · Braugi · Sat Feb 04, 2017 at 01:25:18 pm CST
- Lets face facts · Bk Ray · Sat Feb 04, 2017 at 07:32:52 am CST
- What about Doomsday? · Captainidiot · Fri Feb 03, 2017 at 07:19:00 pm CST
- Superman has always been superior to Thor, from the Silver Age · Marvelfan · Fri Feb 03, 2017 at 01:05:29 pm CST
- Re: Superman vs Thor: Comparison · Olorin · Fri Feb 03, 2017 at 11:26:00 am CST
- Re: Superman vs Thor: Comparison · Rehzon · Thu Feb 02, 2017 at 04:22:56 pm CST
- Re: Superman vs Thor: Comparison · Oliva · Wed Feb 01, 2017 at 03:10:27 pm CST
- Re: Superman vs Thor: Comparison · bd2999 · Wed Feb 01, 2017 at 10:14:23 am CST
- Re: Superman vs Thor: Comparison · Primetime · Wed Feb 01, 2017 at 09:35:48 am CST
- This is getting silly at this point. They didn't even fight in the 2 issues you mentioned. · bouken red · Wed Feb 01, 2017 at 07:46:23 am CST
- Re: Superman vs Thor: Comparison · Poltargyst · Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 10:38:15 pm CST