Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Iron Man is a ripoff of Batman


Matt Foley

Recommended Posts

Billionaire playboy, inherited wealth, gadgets galore, haunted past

The main difference is Batman's identity is a secret, but they couldn't completely rip off the character. Secondary difference...Iron Man has no Joker, just a bunch of villains who ripped off his stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My theory...because the villains aren't over-the-top goofballs.

That and the fx are better AND Scarlett is in IM2, which trumps any chick in Batman.

I don't think Iron Man was better than Batman Begins or The Dark Knight... Haven't seen IM2 yet though...

As far as "getting back to your comic book roots," yes, Tony Stark is a similar character to Bruce Wayne...

I was referring to BB in my post above... TDK was good, but not great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good God, Batmans wanna be Girl Friend was the brokeback mountains sister!

She maybe is the uglyest freaking actress out there...I think her name is Molly Glyanhal?!?!?

Otherwise, I have never really thought about this comparison...it brings up a good point. However, u must take into consideration that Iron Man is Marvel Comics and Batman is DC comics. So its not like its one comic company trying to milk the audience on a "hot trendy superhero".

However, in a fight, as much as I hate to admit, Ironman wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Iron Man movies were just riding the coattails of Batman Beings/DK. I can see where there are similarities as both tried to move out of the "comic book universe" and more into the real world. The Batman reboots are much better though. As far as characters go, yes they are similar but a lot of comic-book characters follow the established superhero archetypes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wealthy playboy superhero, yes. Other than that, the differences stop there. Being that Wayne has beaten Superman, I would think that he could find a way to defeat Stark as well.

I have had to argue with many a people about how Batman beat the holy hell outta Superman.

ANYways, Batman and Spiderman are more alike. They are both considered the perfect example of an "anti-hero". Haunted pasts from murdered family members, vigilantes, secret identities, and conflicts with moral roots make their stories closer than comparing Bruce Wayne to Tony Stark. GRANTED Peter Parker and Bruce Wayne when not in costume are almost opposites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not just wealthy. Both Stark and Wayne are wealthy beyond reality. They're both geniuses, but geniuses don't usually make money, so they both got their money from their parents. It's almost like Marvel saw Batman and said "hmm, let's tweak this and tweak that, but the man whose only superpower is his unlimited checkbook is too good not to do."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • For starters, and again I am not sure what his capacity is in the media or how connected he is to the team, but I posted above Al Wallace says he is "absolutely" getting 50+ a year and he deserves it.  I obviously strongly disagree with it but it feels like like season when the team is slow leaking info to gauge the temp.   Secondly nobody on Gods green earth is going to sign an extension making less than he is making now.  Thats just crazy talk.  
    • No. Physical tools alone aren't enough. There are plenty of examples of draft busts to support that. Aost all of them had the physical tools and that wasn't enough. But Bryce is a perfect example of the opposite. Absolutely elite intangibles aren't enough either. If you simply don't have the physical abilities all the football intelligence and work ethic in the world won't be enough to overcome it. Just look to the sidelines every Sunday. We call those people "coaches".
    • As much as I despise Billy B, his philosophy on QBs is how I would approach things if I were a GM. You always keep looking for your next starter.  He has Bledsoe, who got injured and his backup ended up being the GOAT. Even while he had that going, he kept getting his next guy and developing them. When Brady got hurt, Cassel stepped in and went 11-5 and they missed the wild card by dumb luck. Who knows how far they would have gone if they had gotten in. Jimmy Gs career started in NE. There were others, but he always kept looking.  You can't be afraid to keep looking for your next starter, but it looks like we're afraid to look for more than a marginal one. If you're going to offer a $25m contract with incentives, that screams marginal QB. It also screams you're just a transition until we find our guy. After a 10 or 11 win season, he's not accepting that offer. And then you're in a Daniel Jones situation. Do you pay for a year of success and pray it wasn't a one year wonder?  To this point, Bryce has really produced nothing, yet for whatever reason, our FO has not even sniffed at the idea that we need a real QB room with real QBs. Dalton was never starter potential, Plummer was a joke. KP certainly isn't, neither is Grier.  Our approach to the QB room needs to be one of strength not fear. Bring in guys who can compete or who you think can compete. This is THE elite position, in an elite sport, paid premium salary, where production matters. Either you produce or you can lose your job. It's not mean, it's just the reality of the position.  And I'm really just tired of our candy ass approach to it. 
×
×
  • Create New...