jamonthedoor asked:

In your mass showdown post, you said that Solomon Grundy would defeat Venom with extreme ease. I'm inclined to disagree, if first death means defeat. Grundy doesn't really have much going for him other than his super strength. Venom's strength, while not on par with Grundy's maybe, is still enough to do damage. Couple that with his shape shifting ability, and the fact that Venom is easily more intelligent, and i'd have to say that it isn't an easy win for Grundy, if nothing else.

"Grundy doesn’t really have much going for him other than his super strength"
there’s a factor you’re missing, and it’s the Marvel super strength vs DC super strength difference. it’s a huge difference.

Venom is about class 60, give or take.
Grundy fights guys like Superman and Green Lantern.

He would slap the symbiote right off of Flash Thompson.

not to mention his regenerative ability is way to fast for Venom to keep up with.

bleeding-in-the-snowcone asked:

Been looking to get into a new series and two of the most popular opinions I'm hearing are for Daredevil and Moon Knight. Out of these two, who would come out on top? Winner decides what series I pick up (even though I'll probably get both since so many people are telling me to).

if you can buy both, then you should definitely buy both.
the only thing better than comics is more comics.

i’ll do the showdown a bit later, there are quite a few ahead of you


I am currently internet-less, which means I’m going on an involuntary hiatus until I don’t know when.

kind of a bummer, but I’ll try to pick it back up as soon as practical.

I know i have a few questions in my inbox,
maybe I’ll answer them and do some showdowns at a friend’s house or something.

until next time

Anonymous asked:

Do you think you're biased at all in answering these?

No. I don’t care who my favorite characters can or can not beat up in a fight; that’s not why they’re my favorite characters and I’m more interested in the accuracy of neutral assessment.

Anonymous asked:

I'm so sick of hearing people like you bitch about over powered heroes. That's just your opinion, you can't say "oh he only wins because they write it like that", he only exists because they write him, if not for the writers there is no super hero, so whatever they write is that heroes power, doesn't matter if you think it's right or not, it isn't your story

First off, simmer down a notch or two because you’re coming in way too hot with that.

I don’t remember saying anything about “this character is overpowered" because that’s not really something I would say; for every overpowered hero there’s an overpowered villain. Maybe I have said it in the past, but nothing comes to mind. Either way, I’ll take your word for it and play ball.

"That’s just your opinion"
Literally this entire blog is "just my opinion", and I encourage anyone who disagrees to challenge anything I say. (and I think you’ll notice the stunning lack of disagreement)

"you can’t say ‘oh he only wins because they write it like that’
I absolutely can. It’s called “plot-induced stupidity” and it’s when a writer oversteps a character’s boundaries in order to drive plot. It’s no secret that fan-favorites’ abilities often get stretched a little bit and sometimes the line between what they can and cannot do becomes hazy (Wolverine, Deadpool, Karate Kid, etc.) leaving many readers scratching their heads.

"he only exists because they write him, if not for the writers there is no super hero, so whatever they write is that heroes power"
This is where the problem surfaces. In writing a fictional character we bring in a factor I call implied objectivity. That character has boundaries or specifications, things like “they lift this much, are/are not bulletproof, can move at this speed, etc.”  That’s the implied objectivity. It’s not true objectivity, obviously it’s in a fictitious setting, but we’re supposed to take it as such.

That means when they state for example, that Captain America is strong enough to bench about 1,500lbs can run 49 mph and is not bullet proof, he shouldn’t be flying around in space fighting side-by-side with Thor, Hyperion, Capt. Marvel and other characters who can bench-press the moon and move at the speed of light. That’s inconsistent.  He’d get demolished. But the plot demands that Steve Rogers be there.

Now that’s not a big deal at all, plot and character development is far more important than little details like that, but that doesn’t give a writer free reign to blatantly overstep a previously set boundary.

When Thing defeats Namor under water the bullshit flag gets raised. When Black Panther puts Silver Surfer in an arm-bar or when Spider-man punches out a HERALD OF GALACTUS it undermines everything that was previously established in the dozens of stories that lead up to that moment and readers begin to express opinions. (we’re allowed to do that, by the way. This isn’t a cult, we’re all here voluntarily). because the implied objectivity gets infringed upon.

"doesn’t matter if you think it’s right or not, it isn’t your story"
It does matter. The reason Marvel is so successful is because a huge amount of people like what they do, and the reason a huge amount of people like what they do is because they have done a superb job of storytelling, and that’s largely because they respect consistency within their stories. Writers go through great lengths to make sure their interpretations of their characters are accurate and congruent with that character’s development.  To say “writers can do whatever they want and the readers don’t matter” is just dismissive. As readers we don’t have a say in what happens within the pages of a book, but what happens within the pages of a book is considered successful by its readers.
If its good, we buy it. If it’s not, we don’t. (generally speaking)

I still don’t see what any of this has to do with over-powered characters, though.