I’ll start off by saying that you’re right on many accounts in your reply and that I’m sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you. Things were slow (ok, dead) over the summer for BTSB, but we’re back now and into the swing of things.
First off, a good story is a good story (for example, like you said, Nolan’s The Dark Knight, which had a surprisingly excellent story). And sometimes this obvious fact is best shown comic books.
Secondly, your idea that “the real problem is in the comic industry itself, as it seems to care more about milking heroes for all they’re worth than coming up with really good stuff” couldn’t be more true. This is segueing into movies now, unfortunately (Does anyone care about a Thor movie directed by Kenneth Branagh besides the people set to make bags of money off it?). But let’s remember that there are some very good original and/or independent comics out there, mostly in the form of graphic novels.
Thirdly, your comments about how Superman holds a special place in people’s hearts is spot-on. Superman is not just a comic book superhero, he is a national icon. So much so, that my arguments in the article could be made about Superman and Superman alone. Now that I think about it, there may be some value in comparing and contrasting any two characters, but there’s no sense in comparing Superman to other characters. Every single aspect of Superman comes with baggage, not least of which being his fabulous cape.
This brings me to the most relevant point in your comment: your notion that Superman is both boring and classic. This is part of a whole bigger picture for me. You see, Superman is, well, kind of boring sometimes. I mean, what more can they do with him? Mark Millar’s Red Sun books (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman:_Red_Son), in which Superman lands in the Soviet Union instead of hunky-dory Kansas, were great but were also necessarily short-lived. And the best part about them may have been that they prove that the Superman story needs to be completely rethought and not just pushed along if it is to go forward.
So, I guess I’m admitting that I’ve been thinking along the same lines as most Superman haters. I just haven’t voiced it yet and I certainly didn’t make it known in my article. I was planning on writing a sequel article which would present my misgivings about my favorite superhero and I think you’re comments (and Juha’s) have made me realize it needs to be done.
It might just bring us Superman lovers and haters together.
Thanks again for commenting and stay tuned for the next Superman article.

For another, I admit that despite what I said in my last response, I was biased at the time I’d written it. I was currently at odds with over a dozen different people as to why Batman and Iron Man are “super” and since most of them were terribly biased in superman’s favor, I was just waiting for a chance to tear into a supes fan at the drop of a hat.

As I now view the subject a bit more clearly, I’d like to take another crack at this debate.

By the way:
“So Spider-man tries awful hard when fighting his enemies. Big deal. I’m sure five-year-olds try awful hard when they’re playing ice hockey, but I’d rather watch the NHL.”

Hilarious. Pure comic genius, and a very good point.

But back on the topic of Superman.

Perhaps I’m not really one to be arguing which hero is the best, because as far as I’m concerned, a good story is a good story, and as long as it’s a fun and exciting ride, any hero suits me fine. The only real exception is Batman, because of all the heroes, he’s the only one I’ve consistantly followed since childhood. But even he gets boring sometimes.

And I will admit, Superman, it seems, is the most capable hero on the scene. If we’re arguing the point of which hero would be best if our costumed role models walked the earth, of course it’s superman. That’s what most would say.

But have you thought about doctor strange? In a fight, he could magically whip up some kryptonite, or turn the sun red, or rob superman of his powers, or toss superman into an alternate demension, effectively disarming him in that particular battle.

Am I saying Doctor Strange is better? No. I for one really don’t find him all that interesting because he’s just do darn powerful. And no one else makes the argument because Doctor Strange is not near as recognized as Supes.

My real point is that it can’t be argued that any one hero is the absolute best, because within the comic book world there is always room for making one more powerful than the other.

And outside of the comic book world, there will always be bad stories and good ones. Almost every hero has had his or her share of both, though some are just bad ideas to begin with.

Superman is the first superhero, and because of that he holds a special place in our hearts that no other hero can occupy.

Just look at his appearance. His costume has never really changed at all, apart from barely noticible sprucings. Most heroes have had to drastically alter their appearances to keep up with the times, but never Superman.

Why? Why would it be such a travesty to alter that rather goofy outfit?

Because it stands for something. Because changing Superman’s outfit would demolish a symbol of justice and morality that’s been 70 years in the making.

Batman can change his suit all he likes, because he never had the same weight as a hero.

But when we see those silly blue tights, or that cape that serves no real purpose, or that glorious shining S, we’re whisked away to a time when right was right, and superman could uphold the law without fail, because no corrupt government or insidious villain could stand in his way.

But 70 years is a long time, and he’s got to share the spotlight now, because 70 years is plenty of time to get bored with him.

What Superman, and subsequently ALL superheroes really need, is some darned originality.

It’s hard to come by since all the good ideas were used years ago, but there’s always a way to do something new.

The real problem is in the comic industry itself, as it seems to care more about milking heroes for all they’re worth than coming up with really good stuff.

Take Spider-Man. It’s come to my attention that recently, the spider-man universe was basically reversed by some magical something or other.

The way I understand it is that Spidey struck a deal with the devil to erase:
1) his marriage
2) his unmasking of himself to the world
3) anything else that broke the story away from the daily grind of where spider man was.

Basically what we’re settled with is a medium in which writers do whatever they want knowing that they can just fix it later with some outlandish plot twist, and everything will go back to the way it was.

Superman has great potential to be a vastly interesting and exciting character, and I for one am simply waiting for someone to come along and do with Superman what Christopher Nolan did in Batman Begins.

In conclusion, I’d like to say that it’s been fun debating this topic with you, though I have to admit I get too passionate about the topic of comic books.

Sometimes I’ll argue until I’m blue in the face, then feel really silly when I remind myself that the character I’m fighting so hard to defend doesnt’ even exist.

So don’t think this is an attack on Superman.

But I’d like to meet just ONE Supes fan that doesn’t need to slam Batman to make a point. It’s ridiculous. Besides, there HAVE been times when Batman was forced to fight Superman, and HAS prevailed.

But I digress.

Many of your stances in this article come across as tremendously biased.

Such as:

“Let me tell you what’s boring. When called upon, could Spider-man stop a missile? No. If need be, could Batman hurl a mountain into space? No. The fact is that when the shit really hits the fan here in Superhero-land, there’s only one person to call. If Supes can’t do it, then we’re all in big, big trouble. Period.”

True. Spider-Man and Batman are never faced with such over-the-top odds, but they don’t need to be for their adventures to be exciting. Any high school language teacher will tell you that the more a character in a story suffers, and the less hope they have, the more fun the reader is having.
Spider-Man and Batman are not bullet-proof, therefore, when encirlcled by thugs with guns, it is more exciting to wonder how the face off will end.
The fact is, you cannot judge a character by what kind of fantastic ordeal they must face, but rather by how much of a risk they are taking and how much of a struggle they go through.
When a 15-year-old Peter Parker is shot in the arm, he must seek medical attention, but also find a way to explain to his aunt, his classmates, and the doctor, why he, geeky Peter Parker who’s never even been in a fight, suddenly comes home with gunshot wounds.

I don’t know about you, but that’s an interesting pickle.

Second point:

“I mean, let’s face it; in comics you know that the good guy is going to win. No matter how bad things get, Spidey is coming out on top. And you know that you’re going to have a hero fight a villain. So if you are going to have a battle of good versus evil with a predictable outcome, why not make it a bad ass fight?”

It seems very close-minded to make this statement.
When a battered and bloody Peter Parker gets up off the ground to face another barage of goblin bombs, the simple thrill comes from, again, how hard is he trying?
Sure, Spider-Man cannot stop a missile. But fighting such an overpowering foe is his equivalent.

Third point:

“Batman and the Joker have the fact that they helped to create each other and that they are both sociopaths. But all these rivalries eventually play out in a display of strength, as in the characters fight and the good guy wins. Not so with Superman and Luthor. The Superman/Luthor rivalry pits absolute strength against absolute social power. In my mind, when Superman and Lex Luthor meet, you don’t get any of that cheesy comic book hero/villain banter. No, what you get instead is two suave daddy-o’s, talking calm, like two master chess players, each one just waiting to move in for the kill, like they have all the time in the world. Dig it.”

Alright, here is where I leave the realm of unbiased and indifferent statements and hit you full on with my extremely strong opinion, as I believe that to and extent, a hero is only as cool as the villain he is fighting.
And by the way, according to the original story, while Batman DID effect Joker’s origin, it didn’t go both ways. The idea of Joker killing Batman’s parents eliminates the pure and awesome symbolism of a faceless thug killing them. Because the murderer was never caught, Batman feels that his parents were killed by crime itself, rather than any one man.
But I digress.
Your statement about Lex Luthor breaking the “cheesy banter” mold is moot, as Lex Luthor in the beginning was just a criminal mastermind with almost NO social standing, who was just as cliche as any other villain at the time.
It was only after the Superman reboot that the psuedo-philanthropist Luthor was created. This is, by the way, a villain I absolutely adore.
But if you’re in the market for the greatest villain of all time, you would be remiss to glide over the Joker so.
While Lex Luthor is a heavy hitter in the maniacal schemes department, let’s face it; the Joker is an all around evil bastard without a conscience, who doesn’t know the meaning of “going too far”. A man who goes to great lenghts to perform unthinkable crimes, simply because it pleases him to do so, with little to no personal benefit, is a terrifying thing indeed. I mean, he dresses up like a clown! He doesn’t even take murder seriously. And while Lex Luthor is covering his tracks from his last caper so that his social standing doesn’t go down, Joker takes great pride in letting everyone in on his latest joke.

In the end, no villain surpasses Joker for sheer sinister, blackhearted, remorseless evil.

And as for your point pertaining to Superman’s weakness to kryptonite “making him the spectrum”, while this is an interesting statement, I see little how it helps your argument. The fact remains that superman is just as vulnerable to kryptonite, and you simply find yourself wondering how the latest villain plans to use the rock; will he put it in a weapon, or just hold it in Superman’s face?

In conclusion, I admire your passion, but I really have to say, your views sound very misguided from an impartial stance. Though I think I’d like to hear more from you in the future.

By the way, just as a tidbit, you really sound a lot like my girlfriend with a lot of these arguments. She detests batman. One of our favorite passtimes is arguing about who is better.

The fact that you got me provoked might not surprise you (or anyone else who knows me,) but I’m also speaking for others of my kind: What’s wrong with graphic novels?!!