Originally posted by lando005And that's what this is about. Being an Icon has to do inside and outside of comics medium. Superman has had the single biggest influence of any comic character ever, across the board. That has to do with the comics medium, being the first and original, and still appearing in just as many monthly comics anyone else if not more [given JLA titles, the various Superman titles, and random appearances], the media coverage of having a TV show, or cartoon from now till back in the 30's.
that's not irrelivant at all that's part of the topic to debate here please go back and read the begining of the post while i have be debating impact superman supporters have onlys shown he has more spotlight
You keep repeating, a lot of that has to do with Supes vastly predating Spiderman... I'm replying with . . so what? You're the one that asked for the comparison.
Originally posted by leonidas
you're confusing the issue saying spidey added never-before-seen-depth to charatcers. MARVEL itself decided to take their heroes from the 'less-iconic', completely-perfect-heroes dc had been using, and go for a more 'reality-based' hero set. ff appeared before spidey and the ff had the same kind of depth you're attributing to spiderman -- just look at what happened to poor grim. banner as hulk was also around the same time as spidey and was done in the same character-type. real person, real problems that transferred over to the hero. spiderman has ultimately proven to be perhaps marvel's flagship (though some would argue the xmen hold that more modern role) but it was not spiderman per se who began this type of characterization. it was the direction lee chose to take his charatcers in. it was an entire paradigm shift. and spidey (great as he is) wasn't even at the forefront of it.and FAR before marvel began, batman was already BEGINNING to set the stage for the anti-hero-type.
you're over-creditting spiderman's role in comicdom. i'll not argue he's played a large role, just not so large as you're claiming and certainly not as big a role as any of dc's big 3 -- bats, (first anti-hero), ww (first female -- essentially) or superman (greatest and most important of them all).
as far as movies or games -- who cares? we are (or i thought we were) discussing the characters' relative impacts on the comicbook genre.
Originally posted by lando005Kind of like how Robin died fighting Batman's worst enemy and Batman didn't get there quick enough? He had that one hanging over his shoulder until recently.
i'm not denying bruce in that department he's got it made it just that haveing your parents killed in front of you when your a helpless child is one thing knowing your father figure was killed because of an action that YOU could have prevented is another
Originally posted by leonidasThank you.
you're confusing the issue saying spidey added never-before-seen-depth to charatcers. MARVEL itself decided to take their heroes from the 'less-iconic', completely-perfect-heroes dc had been using, and go for a more 'reality-based' hero set. ff appeared before spidey and the ff had the same kind of depth you're attributing to spiderman -- just look at what happened to poor grim. banner as hulk was also around the same time as spidey and was done in the same character-type. real person, real problems that transferred over to the hero. spiderman has ultimately proven to be perhaps marvel's flagship (though some would argue the xmen hold that more modern role) but it was not spiderman per se who began this type of characterization. it was the direction lee chose to take his charatcers in. it was an entire paradigm shift. and spidey (great as he is) wasn't even at the forefront of it.and FAR before marvel began, batman was already BEGINNING to set the stage for the anti-hero-type.
you're over-creditting spiderman's role in comicdom. i'll not argue he's played a large role, just not so large as you're claiming and certainly not as big a role as any of dc's big 3 -- bats, (first anti-hero), ww (first female -- essentially) or superman (greatest and most important of them all).
as far as movies or games -- who cares? we are (or i thought we were) discussing the characters' relative impacts on the comicbook genre.
Originally posted by Devil Lanceit matters because that's one of the biggest issues i want to try and brign across superman can way ahead of everyone else people didnt have much else to go by and set the bar with him and depicted him as a almost godlike being but if spidy cane across at the same time who would readers realate to more and be more intersted in the near godlike perfect being or the every day man who's life had been turned up side down
why does it matter
and yes I do beleive Supes would still be more Iconic
Originally posted by lando005And yet it still remains that Spiderman would probably not even be a comic character if not for Superman. That's the impact of being an icon, not being a nerd who gets his ass kicked all the time.
you bring up very good points the the fact of the matter is who best portarys the every day man the average joe the underdog? yes all of thoes other chacaters had their issues but spider-man best covered thoes issuse for our standpoint haveing to worry about the rent or getting the job or scoring a date or the school bully, these were things not widely seen in comics before and they are issuse we ALL face and go through in our lives, in that regard spiderman has done more than superman
Originally posted by leonidas
you're confusing the issue saying spidey added never-before-seen-depth to charatcers. MARVEL itself decided to take their heroes from the 'less-iconic', completely-perfect-heroes dc had been using, and go for a more 'reality-based' hero set. ff appeared before spidey and the ff had the same kind of depth you're attributing to spiderman -- just look at what happened to poor grim. banner as hulk was also around the same time as spidey and was done in the same character-type. real person, real problems that transferred over to the hero. spiderman has ultimately proven to be perhaps marvel's flagship (though some would argue the xmen hold that more modern role) but it was not spiderman per se who began this type of characterization. it was the direction lee chose to take his charatcers in. it was an entire paradigm shift. and spidey (great as he is) wasn't even at the forefront of it.and FAR before marvel began, batman was already BEGINNING to set the stage for the anti-hero-type.
you're over-creditting spiderman's role in comicdom. i'll not argue he's played a large role, just not so large as you're claiming and certainly not as big a role as any of dc's big 3 -- bats, (first anti-hero), ww (first female -- essentially) or superman (greatest and most important of them all).
as far as movies or games -- who cares? we are (or i thought we were) discussing the characters' relative impacts on the comicbook genre.
i just hate being at the bottom of a page. 😄
a point was raised though about them coming out at the same and who would THEN be more iconic. that's a . . . silly point. i could say if they both came out TODAY who would be better received. neither. seriously. their names are awful, and they lack some of the modernity of today's characters. both are STILL a little 'old-fashioned' and hardly 'cutting-edge'. if marvel produced both back in the early 60s they would STILL be too different -- supes would NOT have been the hero he has become.
if they had come out at the same time, both would have been VERY different making the point worthless.
Originally posted by Juntaiand nobody's answering the question would he still be where he is if someone like spidy appeared at the same time
And that's what this is about. Being an Icon has to do inside and outside of comics medium. Superman has had the single biggest influence of any comic character ever, across the board. That has to do with the comics medium, being the first and original, and still appearing in just as many monthly comics anyone else if not more [given JLA titles, the various Superman titles, and random appearances], the media coverage of having a TV show, or cartoon from now till back in the 30's.You keep repeating, a lot of that has to do with Supes vastly predating Spiderman... I'm replying with . . so what? You're the one that asked for the comparison.
superman came along by himself so ofcourse he would be the bench mark there was no one else to compair him to at the time
Originally posted by lando005And I'm saying, it's irrelivent, because that's not how it happened, it's not how it stands. This is about who's the bigger icon, not the bigger icon in your hypothetical world where Spiderman was the first true to life super-hero and not Supes.
and nobody's answering the question would he still be where he is if someone like spidy appeared at the same timesuperman came along by himself so ofcourse he would be the bench mark there was no one else to compair him to at the time
Originally posted by Devil Lance
Tell me when spiderman died did that get anywhere close to the amount of coverage Superman's did in the media.
How many live action TV shows has spiderman had .
How many Cartoons has spiderman been in .
compare that to Superman
Saying Spiderman is more iconic then Superman is Ludicrous
When did Spiderman die? If you mean "The Other", nobody even read it. Why? Because it was ruining the most iconic superhero! Superman was one people waited for, because believe it or not, a ton of people hate him.
Originally posted by leonidasTrue enough.
i just hate being at the bottom of a page. 😄a point was raised though about them coming out at the same and who would THEN be more iconic. that's a . . . silly point. i could say if they both came out TODAY who would be better received. neither. seriously. their names are awful, and they lack some of the modernity of today's characters. both are STILL a little 'old-fashioned' and hardly 'cutting-edge'. if marvel produced both back in the early 60s they would STILL be too different -- supes would NOT have been the hero he has become.
if they had come out at the same time, both would have been VERY different making the point worthless.
Originally posted by Juntaiif your the only one of your kind ofcourse your going to be elevated to position of greatest nomatter how good someone else might be who comes along because you were first still not answering the question here
And yet it still remains that Spiderman would probably not even be a comic character if not for Superman. That's the impact of being an icon, not being a nerd who gets his ass kicked all the time.
Originally posted by lando005The question doesn't need to be answered. It's hypothetical and useless to the thread, because it's simply not the way it is. It's not the way it's happened. Superman's iconship involves him being the first true Superhero, the first mass marketed Superhero, the first mass media Superhero.
if your the only one of your kind ofcourse your going to be elevated to position of greatest nomatter how good someone else might be who comes along because you were first still not answering the question here
You're asking us who's the bigger icon today.
And now you're trying to force us into this hypothetical fantasy 'what if' version of reality, where Spiderman is just as old.. but it's irrelivent to what the thread asked for.
Originally posted by Juntaibut that's the whole thing people wanted a hero and had nothing else to go by ther's no way in hell that wouldnt make a diffrence in what people think... all i'm saying is takeing away superman's advantage of comeing first, back then in thoes times when people were most receptive what would have happen? i think it would be a totally diffrent situation
And I'm saying, it's irrelivent, because that's not how it happened, it's not how it stands. This is about who's the bigger icon, not the bigger icon in your hypothetical world where Spiderman was the first true to life super-hero and not Supes.