Who has a better Rogues Gallery: Batman or Spider-Man?

[Captain Canuck]

The fact you against this, you can officially murder my family , rape their corpses, Defecate on them , video tape it and force me to watch the tapes and i will still :heart: my Bassest buddy! (yes +1 pun)

what?

 

[SSJmole]

what?

Who?

 

[Bass]

he's not exactly the same as either of them, but he encompasses the main attributes of both of them. As I see it, Luthor and Joker represent opposite end of the spectrum for really dangerous villains. Luthor is really dangerous b/c he's influential, powerful, ambitious, resourceful, rich, and in a lot of ways untouchable. Joker is really dangerous b/c he's crazy and that's it. He has not real motivation besides causing mayhem and toying with Batman.

Norman Osborn/Green Goblin has both those aspects. He's both sides of the spectrum. He's powerful, influential, ambitious AND crazy. He tries to keep the crazy in check, but when it gets out he's nuts.

I get what you mean, but I think it goes further than that, because a "powerful, ambitious, resourceful, rich, untouchable" villain would work for anyone; isn't that Ra's Al Ghul? Isn't that Chance? Isn't that Kingpin? Isn't that Darkseid?

There's definitely a spectrum of villainy - the mastermind on one end and the thug on the other, but I think it's further than that.

I think it has to do with the relationship between the hero and villain. For example, what makes Lex Luthor and Superman work so completely, I think, is that Lex Luthor is jealous of Superman. He's a bitter, angry man who hates Superman because he helps people. So a typical Lex Luthor story involves him trying to humiliate and undermine Superman. It's not enough that he beats Superman or gets away with his masterplan, it's that he has to totally demean Superman in the process. He doesn't just try to blow up New Jersey and California, he wants to to do it while Superman is helplessly drowning in a swimming pool because he's wearing a Kryptonite necklace that he made Superman find.

Joker, on the other hand, wants to drive Batman insane. A typical Joker story involves him trying to make Batman just snap. He keeps pushing him to the brink of emotional sanity. THE DARK KNIGHT is the archetype of this.

This isn't always the case, and there's other elements to it, but on the whole, Lex Luthor and Joker both ahve this special relationship with the superhero that makes it 'personal'.

Green Goblin's isn't either of those. He doesn't want to demean Spidey nor drive him insane. He wants to dominate Spider-Man. He doesn't want Spidey to beg for his life, like Luthor would. He doesn't want to make Spidey go crazy, like Joker would. He wants Spidey to be his surrogate son.

That is what's so key to Green Goblin. Having him act like Lex Luthor (which is what he is now) or Joker (which is he 'killing girlfriends' mode) makes him derivative, when he should be unique.

 

[Willverine]

I have a particularly soft spot for Mysterio.



I think that the problem here is that Batman attracts a higher quality of writers, on average, than Spidey.

The Green Goblin is horribly overused as "Spidey's Lex Luthor/Joker" as you say, when the character is clearly neither.

Venom has been neutered with repeated over-exposure as a vigilante ("Lethal Protector") or a gorram prop (Scorpion now has the venom suit! Flash has the venom suit! Frog-man has the ****ing venom suit!).

And Doctor Octopus was often treated as Green Goblin II because, y'know, Green Goblin died for twenty ****ing years and so he was just picking up slack. Now that Goblin is back, Doc Ock does nothing at all anymore.

Not that that's how it should be. I love those three characters and would write the hell out of them. Any one of them is capable of THE DARK KNIGHT level of awesomeness for Spidey.

They're just wasted a lot, much like Joker is often just insufferably rubbish.

I agree that the main problem with most of Spidey's rogues gallery is that they haven't been written properly. I'll definitely say that when a capable writer is given to a Spider-Man title, the rogues usually experience their high-water marks. Kraven in "Kraven's Last Hunt/Fearful Symmetry" by DeMatteis was great. Definitely the best Kraven story ever done. Recently, I read an issue of ASM where Doctor Octopus was given a new "lease" that seemed to give him a bit more depth. I liked it.

Of course, the other part of the problem is that when many of these characters were created by Stan Lee, he was pretty much checking off a list of various animals and turning them into guys in suits with powers and gadgets. He didn't care to expand, and a lot of writers after him probably didn't care to get much further into it, either.

But I'm going with Batman for now, just based on depth of individual characters. Plus, the Joker could wipe the floor with most of Spider-Man's rogues gallery before he even got to the Goblin/Octo/Venom/Kingpin "tier".

 

[Captain Canuck]

Who?

when?

I get what you mean, but I think it goes further than that, because a "powerful, ambitious, resourceful, rich, untouchable" villain would work for anyone; isn't that Ra's Al Ghul? Isn't that Chance? Isn't that Kingpin? Isn't that Darkseid?

when you say, "would work for anyone" you mean the description, right? not that the character would work for anyone. if so than, yeah i get that, but the similarities run deeper than that. Ra's Al Ghul is a terrorist, Darkseid is a super powered being who wants to enslave whole planets, Norman and Lex are business men who are criminal masterminds. People know they're shady, but they're good enough to make sure that there is nothing anyone can pin on them. I wasn't saying they are exactly the same, but they are pretty similar. Kingpin is similar to Norman and Lex, but i see him as different in that his relationship with Spidey and DD are less personal for him and more business. Which you talk about so more on this in a sec

There's definitely a spectrum of villainy - the mastermind on one end and the thug on the other, but I think it's further than that.

I think it has to do with the relationship between the hero and villain. For example, what makes Lex Luthor and Superman work so completely, I think, is that Lex Luthor is jealous of Superman. He's a bitter, angry man who hates Superman because he helps people. So a typical Lex Luthor story involves him trying to humiliate and undermine Superman. It's not enough that he beats Superman or gets away with his masterplan, it's that he has to totally demean Superman in the process. He doesn't just try to blow up New Jersey and California, he wants to to do it while Superman is helplessly drowning in a swimming pool because he's wearing a Kryptonite necklace that he made Superman find.

Joker, on the other hand, wants to drive Batman insane. A typical Joker story involves him trying to make Batman just snap. He keeps pushing him to the brink of emotional sanity. THE DARK KNIGHT is the archetype of this.

This isn't always the case, and there's other elements to it, but on the whole, Lex Luthor and Joker both ahve this special relationship with the superhero that makes it 'personal'.

Green Goblin's isn't either of those. He doesn't want to demean Spidey nor drive him insane. He wants to dominate Spider-Man. He doesn't want Spidey to beg for his life, like Luthor would. He doesn't want to make Spidey go crazy, like Joker would. He wants Spidey to be his surrogate son.

That is what's so key to Green Goblin. Having him act like Lex Luthor (which is what he is now) or Joker (which is he 'killing girlfriends' mode) makes him derivative, when he should be unique.

okay, this is a really good point. And as I mentioned above, I wasn't saying that GG is Exactly the same as Lex or Joker, nor that he should be. But I don't think his motivations are as simple as you make them out to be, either. To be fair, you admitted there are other elements to the characters and I think you're essentially right about the main driving motivations, but with GG/Norman the motivation seems to vary depending on who's more in control (Norman or the GG). The "killing girlfriends mode" is classic Green Goblin, it's not a recent addition to his character. I can't accept that's not the way he should be written when that's one of the defining moments in his career. Before GG killed Gwen Stacy he was just a goon in a costume trying to take over the underworld, After he killed her, that changed (of course he died too and was out of the picture for a long time).

What I'm trying to say is, sometimes GG is very much trying to drive Spidey insane (it depends on who's writing him, but in the stories it always seems to be when Norman loses it and GG takes over that this becomes his motivation). Other times when Norman is more in control his motivations change. The surrogate son thing is for sure the most interesting part of GG/Spidey's relationship, especially with the dynamic it creates for Peter and Harry. This is the coolest hero/villain dynamic in comics in my opinion and, as you said, it IS very unique.

I don't know if any of that made sense or if my arguments flowed, but let me boil it down. I don't want Norman to be a Lex clone and I don't want the GG to be a Joker clone. But It bugs me when people list Joker and Lex above GG as awesome villains b/c, in my opinion, he's got a lot of what they've got mixed up in one character, and then some. That's all I'm really trying to say.

 

[Gemini]

I think the correct answer is Iron Fist

 

[The Overlord]

I agree that the main problem with most of Spidey's rogues gallery is that they haven't been written properly. I'll definitely say that when a capable writer is given to a Spider-Man title, the rogues usually experience their high-water marks. Kraven in "Kraven's Last Hunt/Fearful Symmetry" by DeMatteis was great. Definitely the best Kraven story ever done. Recently, I read an issue of ASM where Doctor Octopus was given a new "lease" that seemed to give him a bit more depth. I liked it.

Of course, the other part of the problem is that when many of these characters were created by Stan Lee, he was pretty much checking off a list of various animals and turning them into guys in suits with powers and gadgets. He didn't care to expand, and a lot of writers after him probably didn't care to get much further into it, either.

But I'm going with Batman for now, just based on depth of individual characters. Plus, the Joker could wipe the floor with most of Spider-Man's rogues gallery before he even got to the Goblin/Octo/Venom/Kingpin "tier".

But here's the thing, a lot of villains are like that, even in Batman' s rogues gallery. No one cared about mr. Freeze till BTAS came around and he was changed from a flat character to a sympathetic character. Another problem is sometimes a writer makes these changes and then the next one forgets all about them and uses the character as a punching bag. There are tons of villans that could be interesting if the writer develops them a bit more.

You have to have writers make these changes and then have other writers stick with them.

Another problem is Batman had something like BTAS that further developed some B-list Bat villains. USM often dropped the ball when it came to developing villains, Ultimate Electro is even more boring then 616 Electro. The new Spidey cartoon is the only other media form that tries to develop Spidey's villains further then in the comics (well some of the movies I guess.)

Also on a general note, Flash's rogues gallery is an acquired taste, its hard to argue Captain Cold is as cool Joker or Green Goblin, etc without a lot of explanation. Flash's rogues gallery isn't seen as instantly awesome like Batman and Spider-Man's rogues gallery.

 

[Bass]

when you say, "would work for anyone" you mean the description, right?

That's what I meant.

okay, this is a really good point.

Cheers. ^__^

I don't know if any of that made sense or if my arguments flowed, but let me boil it down. I don't want Norman to be a Lex clone and I don't want the GG to be a Joker clone. But It bugs me when people list Joker and Lex above GG as awesome villains b/c, in my opinion, he's got a lot of what they've got mixed up in one character, and then some. That's all I'm really trying to say.

I totally agree.

 

[Captain Canuck]

That's what I meant.



Cheers. ^__^



I totally agree.

well alright then!