olympian
Now, it isent much of a national secret that i enjoy time to time lurking at SHC. The people there are great for the most part, i got to know cool people like X, Imperial and Thorion and theyr respect threads are just marvelous (no, i mean marvelous, not Marvel. Dont start with biases about companies).
One of the most heated debates that sprang recently over there is a Hercules and Superman debate. A debate that Genis started having with some others and that quickly got out of control. Now note, this isent a slant against him, neither blind support. The same can be said to those he was debating against, respect flows both ways.
But as a fan of one of the characters involved, ill try to give the intel i can muster, and my personal opinion in the topics that got my interest over there. This is about Marvel Hercules btw:
A) "Hercules is "the strongest Avenger ever".
Yes, yes. He was called that by the Wasp during the encounter with the Dire Wraits. How revelant is this statement? For those who expected to be alot, sorry but not THAT much. If not a single one of the Avengers strongmen had been called such, it sure would be. But Thor, Hulk and Wonderman have all been called that. The one thing we know by using this kind statement is, who are the strongest avengerS ever. Well, those four are and id also add Gilgamesh to that list. As you can see, to define the single strongest of the bunch we would have to use other evidence.
B) "Is Hercules stronger than the Hulk"?
Depends the state Hulk is at the moment. That should be a non brainer. And no, he doesnt need to achieve *the limitess level* (whatever the heck that is) to become stronger than Herc, Thor or Superman for that matter. Why? Because in comics none of those are *infinite* either.
C) "Is Hercules stronger than Superman"?
The very argument at heart. There are people who think Thor/Herc are sligthy stronger, others who think Superman is sligthy stronger. Personal opinions are a pain to prove when all those have done insane things.
I have mine. And whoever YOU think has the edge strengthwise i belive its clear to tell that they are all in the same ballpark. Saying any of those is "much" stronger or would win "easily" in a fist match (strength and durability only) against the other, is getting too much coffe time.
D) "Superman still wins slugfest. Herc. does not really have a win over somebody on Supermans strength and durability level. That isn't a jobber"
Good old SnoopDawg. What can i answer to this one. Oh yeah. Better ponctuation. Hey, i know mine isent perfect, but jessaz. Good to know you are still the best for laugths.
E) "What are Hercs. best feats of strength? And please no hyperbole feats."
What did i just said? *laugths* You mean as hyperbolic as WW and Superman holding the "entire mass of the DCUniverse" like ive read over here? Well, there is one i can think of actually. We will get back at it later.
G) "So wich Hercules feat is hyperbolic here"?
Not the feat itself but perhaps what was described during the feat. When Thor and Hercules punched an dimensional gate (meaning each one closed a *door* that ended with the destruction of the *brigde*) with sheer strength alone, it was described that between both there was enough power to demolish "worlds".
Now, this is hyperbolic. Why? Because neither Thor or Hercules have a single other example of causing the destruction of several worlds with just the fists. Neither Superman for that matter. Remember the clash between the Golden Age Superman and the post crisis one in the recent Infinite Crisis series? The same thing. Hyperbolic.
H) "But wait! The Earth feat of Herc was stated as well - when doing another feat"!
Ah, it fits that perhaps the most contraversy solo feat for the comic version of the mythical character ends in here. (in the *H* get it? Aw shaddup). So, did it happened? is it hyperbolic? To put it simply and using my opinion: Yes and No.
It did happened and its not hyperbole until this day. First of all, the labours are in continuity for Marvel. The 12 of them (stables too). We have since Herc`s moderm appearances in the 60`s- statements, narration lines and even on panel-flashbacks that sustain that they happened.
The best example to support the Earth feat is exactly the panel from wich he made the Manhattan drag (no, im not using Need For Speed slant here) where the narration states it clean. So why should i use this one that showed up in a narration where the other was hyperbolic? Because the other wasent supported by more evidence. This one is. Keep reading.
I) "ok, ok! But...what about the contriversy PAGE"?
Yes, Hercules does gloat alot. Marvel Hercules at least. But was he lying about it? We know he -was- when -describing the clash between him and Thor-. Not only it contradicted every single other match they had before but we have -statements- from the story itself that he was exageratting. His own remarks about the kid who was a Thor fan and the fact he changed it tells it much. Jarvis reaction when hearing the story as well. But here it is, thats about the clash. What about the retelling of the labours? For him to lie about the Earth feat he would have to lie about every single labour that showed up. They are all in the same page and not one seemed more revelant to his point or important than the other in order to lie about ONE feat. Also, note that you dont have Jarvis reacting badly about it, you dont have Herc thinking to himself how hes lying, a narration hint, the kids calling him a godamn liar, nada.
Add the fact that as said before the labours ARE in continuity...without having a particular panel or text stating he NEVER did it. Not in this story and as much as ive read not in another.
(in this case i dont consider it hyperbolic either because he has done earth class shit most notably against Thor like the infamious armwrestle match).
If you lasted thro all this, cheers to you chump!
One of the most heated debates that sprang recently over there is a Hercules and Superman debate. A debate that Genis started having with some others and that quickly got out of control. Now note, this isent a slant against him, neither blind support. The same can be said to those he was debating against, respect flows both ways.
But as a fan of one of the characters involved, ill try to give the intel i can muster, and my personal opinion in the topics that got my interest over there. This is about Marvel Hercules btw:
A) "Hercules is "the strongest Avenger ever".
Yes, yes. He was called that by the Wasp during the encounter with the Dire Wraits. How revelant is this statement? For those who expected to be alot, sorry but not THAT much. If not a single one of the Avengers strongmen had been called such, it sure would be. But Thor, Hulk and Wonderman have all been called that. The one thing we know by using this kind statement is, who are the strongest avengerS ever. Well, those four are and id also add Gilgamesh to that list. As you can see, to define the single strongest of the bunch we would have to use other evidence.
B) "Is Hercules stronger than the Hulk"?
Depends the state Hulk is at the moment. That should be a non brainer. And no, he doesnt need to achieve *the limitess level* (whatever the heck that is) to become stronger than Herc, Thor or Superman for that matter. Why? Because in comics none of those are *infinite* either.
C) "Is Hercules stronger than Superman"?
The very argument at heart. There are people who think Thor/Herc are sligthy stronger, others who think Superman is sligthy stronger. Personal opinions are a pain to prove when all those have done insane things.
I have mine. And whoever YOU think has the edge strengthwise i belive its clear to tell that they are all in the same ballpark. Saying any of those is "much" stronger or would win "easily" in a fist match (strength and durability only) against the other, is getting too much coffe time.
D) "Superman still wins slugfest. Herc. does not really have a win over somebody on Supermans strength and durability level. That isn't a jobber"
Good old SnoopDawg. What can i answer to this one. Oh yeah. Better ponctuation. Hey, i know mine isent perfect, but jessaz. Good to know you are still the best for laugths.
E) "What are Hercs. best feats of strength? And please no hyperbole feats."
What did i just said? *laugths* You mean as hyperbolic as WW and Superman holding the "entire mass of the DCUniverse" like ive read over here? Well, there is one i can think of actually. We will get back at it later.
G) "So wich Hercules feat is hyperbolic here"?
Not the feat itself but perhaps what was described during the feat. When Thor and Hercules punched an dimensional gate (meaning each one closed a *door* that ended with the destruction of the *brigde*) with sheer strength alone, it was described that between both there was enough power to demolish "worlds".
Now, this is hyperbolic. Why? Because neither Thor or Hercules have a single other example of causing the destruction of several worlds with just the fists. Neither Superman for that matter. Remember the clash between the Golden Age Superman and the post crisis one in the recent Infinite Crisis series? The same thing. Hyperbolic.
H) "But wait! The Earth feat of Herc was stated as well - when doing another feat"!
Ah, it fits that perhaps the most contraversy solo feat for the comic version of the mythical character ends in here. (in the *H* get it? Aw shaddup). So, did it happened? is it hyperbolic? To put it simply and using my opinion: Yes and No.
It did happened and its not hyperbole until this day. First of all, the labours are in continuity for Marvel. The 12 of them (stables too). We have since Herc`s moderm appearances in the 60`s- statements, narration lines and even on panel-flashbacks that sustain that they happened.
The best example to support the Earth feat is exactly the panel from wich he made the Manhattan drag (no, im not using Need For Speed slant here) where the narration states it clean. So why should i use this one that showed up in a narration where the other was hyperbolic? Because the other wasent supported by more evidence. This one is. Keep reading.
I) "ok, ok! But...what about the contriversy PAGE"?
Yes, Hercules does gloat alot. Marvel Hercules at least. But was he lying about it? We know he -was- when -describing the clash between him and Thor-. Not only it contradicted every single other match they had before but we have -statements- from the story itself that he was exageratting. His own remarks about the kid who was a Thor fan and the fact he changed it tells it much. Jarvis reaction when hearing the story as well. But here it is, thats about the clash. What about the retelling of the labours? For him to lie about the Earth feat he would have to lie about every single labour that showed up. They are all in the same page and not one seemed more revelant to his point or important than the other in order to lie about ONE feat. Also, note that you dont have Jarvis reacting badly about it, you dont have Herc thinking to himself how hes lying, a narration hint, the kids calling him a godamn liar, nada.
Add the fact that as said before the labours ARE in continuity...without having a particular panel or text stating he NEVER did it. Not in this story and as much as ive read not in another.
(in this case i dont consider it hyperbolic either because he has done earth class shit most notably against Thor like the infamious armwrestle match).
If you lasted thro all this, cheers to you chump!
Whooooooooooo!!!! . So in your very unbiased opinion who is stronger? Herc. or Superman? No crap talk either I need a straight answer.
