Supes or Hulk/ Which concept makes more sense

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
disagree PR, Scientific Experiments have done weird shit to people over the years. a hyper advanced alien race picking out our tiny primitive planet in a vast endless universe to send there only child and probably last surviving member, where the chances of him getting stepped on by primitives is extremely high, even if say Krypton was real, no one in there right mind would do that.
That's not even getting started on the whole Sunlight powering up skin and bone thing.

Experiments exist that make animals and people go crazy.
Drugs and plants etc etc also exist that make people go nuts, these are actual real things that have been done tested and used in and outside of labs, I believe there IS life out there in the universe, but I don't for one second believe there is life anywhere near as advanced as Krytonian life.

Like technically all aliens and us benefit from the sun.
but red sunlight vs yellow sunlight vs blue sunlight makes absolutely zero sense, basing your powers on colors means nothing
all sorts of blue red and yellow suns have different combinations of elements and radiation they give off.

So is the thread about powers or not?

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
Some of Marvel's characters are literally based on the human condition. That's the very concept of the X-Men universe in Marvel. They took the race argument and flippednit on its head. The Hulk is legit based on the emotional aspect of the human condition. It's practically based on Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde which was also centered around the human condition of a split personality. That's the Hulk in a nutshell. Superman is a literal alien immigrant from another planet who is born with miraculous powers that manifest once he hits puberty. His story has to do with adapting to a people that aren't your own than it does saving the city or the world from any and all threats. The Hulk's story is different. Bruce Banner gets pissed off by someone, turns into the Hulk, trashes whoever made him angry, and then reverts back to normal. His whole story is about controlling that anger. The concept for each character, when written correctly, dictates the type of story that the writers tell.

both, but when i mentioned this it wasn't power related.

Originally posted by -Pr-
You really should have been clearer in the OP, then. But okay.

So your question is which one has a more realistic personality?

and powers, yes.

So powers:
One is an alien, the other is magical science.

Characters:
One is a good person, the other lashes out when angry (even though we saw what happens when Superman is angry, in that Superman/WW Sacrifice thread when he thinks Doomsday killed Lois).

Ok.

Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
and powers, yes.

Okay.

Personality = Banner's an angry *******. Superman has a goodness and decency we can only aspire too. Banner is obviously more realistic.

Powers = Neither make sense at all, given what we know about gamma rays. From a narrative perspective though, Superman's requires less suspension of disbelief. You can handwave a lot of shit just by saying "oh, he's an alien". It's like the X-Men. It doesn't require explanation... which was my original point.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Okay.

Personality = Banner's an angry *******. Superman has a goodness and decency we can only aspire too. Banner is obviously more realistic.

Powers = Neither make sense at all, given what we know about gamma rays. From a narrative perspective though, Superman's requires less suspension of disbelief. You can handwave a lot of shit just by saying "oh, he's an alien". It's like the X-Men. It doesn't require explanation... which was my original point.

Yet thanks to Pak, only one of the two characters here have killed, lol.

****ing Pak...

Originally posted by Supermutant
Realistically typing fictional characters are in fact fictional. The Easter bunny isn't more realistic than Santa Claus.

You take that back, heathen!

😠