My favourite superheroes are Batman and Spiderman.
I think we are all under-estimating both of these characters. There's nothing I hate more than the "Batman has no super-powers he SuX0rz" arguements.
Batman is the most dangerous superhero of all. Why? Because everybody he goes up against has underestimated his ability in some way. I think him fighting Spidey would be an incredibly close call, and because I like them both so much, I'm calling it down the middle. Just because Batman beats Spiderman once, doesn't mean Spiderman couldn't whup him another day.
Another arguement that is irrelevent is the whole "Well Batman beat Hulk but Hulk beat Spidey" arguement. It means absolutely squat. Just because Spidey got beat by Hulk means that he CANNOT beat Batman? Nonsense. Every fight is different, the factors and variables will be different in each fight. In fact, if I was a writer wishing to keep balance, I would have Batman get beat by Spiderman because it would keep a balanced circle of power between all the characters. Batman > Hulk > Spiderman > Batman.
Writers think of this all of the time. In fact, the mere debating over their power means that the writers have done a great job on their characters, and that is all that matters.
I know this sounds silly, but the pro wrestling industry works in the same way. There is what is known as "heat". You lose a fight, your "heat" is passed on to the victor. That's pretty much it, and because of this system, that means there is no "true" dominant fighter, as each one has a good chance of beating the other.
It would come down to the fact that if Batman has beaten so many characters, and Spiderman has been beaten by so many, then the logical step in terms of character would be to have Spidey win.
Red Superfly, you have some good points, but I don't agree with two things:
1. People underestimate Batman: I don't agree. Of course, there are always some not too bright villains who think they can easily kill Batman, but most of his opponents don't underestimate him! Batman has a huge reputation in the DC-Universe. Most heroes and bad guys respect his fighting skills, his willpower, and his intelligence.
To be honest, I think Spider-man is one of the most underrated heroes, mainly because he hasn't the body of a bodybuilder and because he tells lots of jokes. Batman is more the strong silent type, like I am hahaha, and that impresses people. Spider-man is a wisecracking and jumping hero. That doesn't look that impressive, especially for the people who think that being cool (strong and silent) is the same as being almost invincible.
That is, in my opinion, the reason why lots of people don't seem to realize the full powers of Spider-man. He isn't dark enough. But I like him the way he is ;-)
2. As far as I know, Batman never beat (up) the hulk, he only lured the hulk in some room filled with gas. Big deal, and you can believe me when I say that it was very bad writing. You can compare it to some of the old 70's comics where Superman faces Muhammed Ali and actually gets knocked down by "the greatest".
I really don't see why such a bad comic even gets mentioned. And Spider-man beat the hulk too. And Juggernaut. And Titiana (without breaking a sweat). And Firelord. And Rhino. And Goliath. And Venom. And so on... All mega-powered people who can fight the hulk any day (fight, probably not win, but it will be very good fights).
So people, please stop mentioning the "Batman beat the Hulk" thing. It's getting boring.
Have a nice day all :-)
Originally posted by Red Superfly
My favourite superheroes are Batman and Spiderman.There's nothing I hate more than the "Batman has no super-powers he SuX0rz" arguements.
.
wow...talk about melting my eyes. Did I just read thru every post on this thread today??? Slow day at work..heheheh...
I have to say I like Batman more but agree with all of Domination's arguments. And the site that says Batman can beat ___? really gives a good rant. I can imagine Spidey's fist connecting to Batman's gut and punching his liver out of his body..lol...or uppercutting his head so his lower jaw flies into his brain. The strength is just too big of a factor.
And I don't understand using crossover and elseworld stories as evidence. That's like saying "hmm....if Batman kicked Neo's ass in some wack storyline, i can use it to say he can kick Spider-man's ass." Let's just say Marvel and DC characters never met before and
Spidey meets Batman for the very first time. With no prep time, Bats is out in like 2 secs.
Something as far-fetched as Spidey enveloping a 20 ft diameter webnet around the Dark Knight and then delivering the fatal blow comes to mind. Or shooting a web rite enveloping Batman's face so while he's trying to cut it apart, another blow to the back and "crack" the spinal cord is severed. Easy as that.
Batman would have to cheat. Pretend like he's a weakling and do something totally dirty.
Spy, even if Spider-Man were to beat Batman, he wouldn't kill him dummy. Neither of the two would fight to kill the other in a battle. So using arguments like "Spider-Man could just rip his spinal column out!" reflects poorly on your intelligence. But you raise a good point, the only way Batman could win would be to fight dirty, and you know what...that's exactly what he would do and why he would win. Batman does fight dirty and that's how he wins in general and that's how he'd win against Spider-Man. The wiser of the two knows he doesn't need strength and powers to win. How do you think he beat Hulk? Hulk has the potential to be the strongest being in the universe and a simple human beat him? Of course, because Hulk is an idiot. The veteran crimefighter always wins. The Dark Knight over Spidey any day of the week...
I think who-kid? has shown us the futility of this arguement. If Muhammed Ali can knock down Superman then anything is possible in the world of comics.
We'd be more accurate if we replaced "Batman would kill Spidey easily" with "Batman would open up a sweet shop selling crack while Spidey would be the mild-mannered but insane janitor"
Originally posted by Knightfall
Spy, even if Spider-Man were to beat Batman, he wouldn't kill him dummy. Neither of the two would fight to kill the other in a battle. So using arguments like "Spider-Man could just rip his spinal column out!" reflects poorly on your intelligence.
When I think of them 2 going at each other, I assume "no holds barred." This is a test of the ability to do damage, not the willingness to do so. If you wanna assume nobody will make the killing strike, then wuz the point of arguing? Death is the end right? Both Spider-Man and Batman HAS killed before in one point of their lives. The earliest Batman stories had him doing that before they put a stop to it. And dont' say "well then based on your argument they can both use guns or tanks to blow up each other if they really wanted to kill each other." Nope. We're still assuming they're using just their skills and bodies. Reflect on that.
How do you think he beat Hulk? Hulk has the potential to be the strongest being in the universe and a simple human beat him? Of course, because Hulk is an idiot. The veteran crimefighter always wins.
...wow.....the veteran crimefighter always wins? Get Bruce Lee together with some 70 year old cop and see who wins--the veteran crimefighter? Ok, let's not even base it on reality. Get Batman when he's 70 years old to fight Wolverine (whose age could be a lot older) or some old metahuman who decides to be a vigilante. He's still a rookie but I'm sure he can kick senior citizen-Bats. And obviously you didn't read my argument to NOT use previous crossovers and elsewhere stories as evidence.
I agree with your argument, SpyCspider, to not refer to cross-overs (especially the old ones) because they are rubbish. They suck, plain and simple.
And to the people who think Batman is the only one who beat the Hulk: read my previous message. By the way, I don't recall anybody saying that the Hulk was invincible.
There is lots of evidence why Spider-man would win in a random fight against Batman, such as strength, speed, agility, his web, the ability to jump real far and stick to walls and, most of all, his spider-sense. These abilities, compared with his intelligence, his much higher endurance and his experience, make him a formidable opponent. Everybody knows that, at least I assumed that.
Batman has also his "weapons" like intelligence (he is probably a bit smarter than Spidey) and his experience. His other weapons won't do much good against Spider-man. Spider-man can dodge everything while sleepwalking. So when they first meet, and they start fighting each other for some (stupid) reason, Spider-man easily wins. It won't take long.
Knightfall, you are right when you say that Batman fights dirty - that is one of the reasons I like Batman !! But you forget two things:
1. Spider-man can also fight dirty.
2. How will Batman fight dirty against Spider-man? Spider-man doesn't have an obvious weakness like Superman has. And don't tell me that "Batman will find something" because that is too vague.
Although I realize that Batman is, in some fields, quite brilliant, he is no Edison or Einstein. It isn't so that he just goes home and, after a few hours, finds a way to dismantle his spider-sense or his superpowers or whatever. Spider-man has no special weaknesses, and certainly not weaknesses that Batman can exploit during a fight.
See you people
Oh, I read your argument. But you're assuming I cared. I'll use any evidence for my argument I want, regardless of what you think of it. Secondly, I'm not quite sure how you equate the term "veteran" with a senior citizen. Batman isn't an old man, but he has much more experience. Lastly, yeah technically Batman has killed, but you're talking old old old comics. They've revised his image and he does not kill anymore. Neither of them kill. No holds barred or not. And in response to who?-kid's comment: everyone has a weakness...everyone.