Do you like superheros with no apparent weaknesses (superman, hulk) or vulnerable hero's like BATMAN, IRON MAN

Answer 1

Personally, I prefer the 'vulnerable' hero, as you call it.

I am intrigued and interested in the motivations and actions taken by the more common hero. To see the inner resolve and work ethic and intelligence and creativiy of these types is impressive.

To me, there is little interest in those with seemingly no weekness - take Superman, for example, basically he could (and why he doesn't I don't know) eliminate almost any threat by flying into orbit and the using telescopic and heat vision, destroy said threat.

Another aspect is there is - okay, probably not really - the possiblity that such a vulnerable hero could exist - perhaps the new technologies that come along could make an Iron Man possible....or if you were to go through so much training, you could be Batman-like.

I think folks can relate to this better than being a nigh-invulnerable Hulk or a god-like Thor.

Answer 2

Generally speaking, I do find myself liking lower-powered, more street-level heroes as I get older, as I ask myself more and more often, "Ok, how would this work in *our* real world here?"

I can explain Batman easily with current levels of science and technology. Iron Man....heh, he's a bit more of a stretch but only half a technological generation off if the recent advances in Japanese robotics and exoskeletons are any indication. ^_^

Superman and the Hulk are only really explainable if you *really* push the bleeding-edge technology--pushing the genetic engineering and nanotechnology. Which might make sense for an Alien from Distant Shores, but is less sensible for a homegrown Person of Mass Destruction (like Ultimate Hulk).

But I digress. My point is, I generally like lower-powered, more street-level heroes just because I like my characters a bit more *human* and approachable. I could *see* Spider-Man in traffic court explaining to the judge why he has a Parking Ticket or a dozen....

Or, conversely, I could see why someone like Logan Garfield (that Beast Boy from the Titans) might be ambivalent about being a "hero" as he grows older....his powers *do* come from having a *disease* after all.

But.....there is a problem, a bit of a loophole here. Batman and Iron Man both are *billionaires* these days. I can't relate to that. I can't relate to either the problems or the politics that implies. Which is why in my mind Michael Keaton's take on Batman in the first two movies will always stand out: because he took this guy, Bruce Wayne, and in the question at the *start* of the first film, about the champagne, he really nailed it. He showed the audience that Mr. Wayne was just *this guy* really, pretending to be the rich playboy, and that he had no more clue than *we did* as to how these soiree things work. He made the Man of the Mansion human and accessible.

And I think that's going to be the big thing. Character.

You can make a hero as cosmic and all-mighty-then as you want to, like say Captain Mar-Vell (over at Marvel Comics), make him a total tank....and still keep him *human enough* that he ends up dying of *cancer*, of all things....and it can still work, because it's *IN character*. It works for *that guy* because the readers knew *that guy*.

That is what's going to count. At the end of your comic book, at the end of the issue, do your readers *still know* these people? This is why _Smallville_ worked. It gave people a fair chance to *know* the real, younger, pre-bumble-and-fumble Clark Kent.

Which is why I like more ordinary heroes. They are *easier* to know. But it has less to do with the powers and more to do with the *writing*. People can be more or less *Impossible* to kill....and still be some of the most engaging characters in comics.

Case in point: a certain chick who *walks through walls*. ^_^ She was played by Ellen Page in an X-Men film, right? Heh. You know who I'm talking about *instantly*. And for all that, she can't really be hurt, not by physical means. Not that Kitty Pryde has any *offense* either, but still. ^_^

It's character. Do we know these people? That's the question, the first one, the last one, and the one on *every* page in between.

Thanks for your time! ^_^

Answer 3

Vulnerable like Batman, the guys and girls without superpowers are that much more inspiring and realistic. Well realistic in the sense that if you had enough money, and were that messed up, you could do it, or at least give a really good wack at a try.
Plus there's that added danger for their supporting cast, at lot of them will get killed off, or seriously injured. And you don't need superpowers or such to do it, you just need a weapon and one lucky shot.

Answer 4

Isn't that why these characters are called superheros? I love this type of entertainment. Superman and Batman are my favorites. Peace and God Bless.

Answer 5

Man that is a toughy. But I will go with Superman. It makes the plots soooo much more creative.

Answer 6

hey,
i like spider man and super man in which comes of batman its a boring and and boring

Answer 7

i like ones like spiderman cos batman is boring

Answer 8

vulneralblity is the best (go spiderman)