Which superheroes do you find least interesting or appealling?

[Apocalypso]

The X-Men (all of them). The whole "prejudice against mutants" storyline just got too damn preachy for me after a while, and it felt like a thinly disguised rant against real life racism. Plus Cyclops is a dick.

Also, yet another vote for invincible, perfect, goody two shoes Superman.

[Bakhesh]

Originally Posted by Apocalypso

The X-Men (all of them). The whole "prejudice against mutants" storyline just got too damn preachy for me after a while, and it felt like a thinly disguised rant against real life racism. Plus Cyclops is a dick.

Also, yet another vote for invincible, perfect, goody two shoes Superman.

I thought the saving grace of the recent Avengers vs Xmen crossover (which was largely rubbish) was....

SPOILER:

Cyclops ends up locked up in a ruby crystal cell for war crimes. He has been moving more and more into mutant extremism over the past few years, and surrounding himself with former villains. When you are on the same side as Emma Frost, Magento and Namor, you are probably on the wrong side.

It was nice for marvel to acknowledge that he was now crossed the line into being a bad guy. Just hope they keep him there for a while

[Hbns]

Originally Posted by Apocalypso

The whole "prejudice against mutants" storyline just got too damn preachy for me after a while, and it felt like a thinly disguised rant against real life racism.

I don't think it was meant to be 'thinly disguised'. More of an obvious rant against prejudice in general I think.

For me it was Daredevil and Captain Marvel (of Marvel Comics). Never really appealed to me. Daredevil seemed like an old man, a generation apart, where other characters seemed more like peers. Cpt. Marvel was and is and will forever be just poke in the DC comics eye to me. Never seemed like a "real" character.

[Anaamika]

Originally Posted by Apocalypso

The X-Men (all of them). The whole "prejudice against mutants" storyline just got too damn preachy for me after a while, and it felt like a thinly disguised rant against real life racism. Plus Cyclops is a dick.

.[/b]

It wasn't meant to be thinly disguised. Some anvils need to be dropped. That being said, I can certainly understand why it would be preachy. Personally I hate how in every nature program we need to talk about how man is totally raping the environment that second. Can't we just enjoy the beauty of nature in peace for a moment?

[Infovore]

Originally Posted by Hbns

For me it was Daredevil and Captain Marvel (of Marvel Comics). Never really appealed to me. Daredevil seemed like an old man, a generation apart, where other characters seemed more like peers. Cpt. Marvel was and is and will forever be just poke in the DC comics eye to me. Never seemed like a "real" character.

I remember the "Death of Captain Marvel" (the male version) graphic novel being quite good, but the last time I read it was in college so my memory might be faulty.

[Acsenray]

Originally Posted by the_diego

The Afro-American Green Lantern

John Stewart

[Sunshine and Smiles]

I never got to into DC comics for many of the reasons stated by other dopers here - bland personalities, unremarkable villains, overly-broad powers.

I'll also second (third, fourth, whatever) Daredevil. My problem was always with his 'superpower' - Matt Murdoch is blind, but because of his heightened other senses he can ninja around as if he weren't. Which only has the effect of making him not seem blind. So what's the point?

Until the movie, I never gave Iron Man a chance. Why would I want to read a comic about a schlubby alcoholic playboy cavorting around in his designer suit?

Any of the proper gods which were co-opted for comics - Thor, Loki, Hercules, etc. They just get me thinking about the relative power differences. In a universe where you've got super-heavies like Thanos and Adam Warlock running around, it seems hard to imagine 'real' gods like Odin and co. being anywhere near that power level, but according to their own mythos shouldn't they be somewhere in the vicinity?

[Love Rhombus]

My issue with the X-men and mutants in general (and if this is hijack-ish I will happily acknowledge it and shut up) is that sometimes I had a hard time seeing mutant prejudice as a bad thing. Humans are bad enough as is, but given powers would be much worse. I suppose the problem is that we don't really see too much of "Average Joe" mutants, just the militarized ones.

[Beastly Rotter]

Originally Posted by Intergalactic Gladiator

Pym Particles: better than viagra!

Pimp Articles.

[digs]

Originally Posted by CandidGamera

Daredevil. I just wonder what the pitch was.

"Okay, he's like Spider-Man, but his life is even worse, and totally devoid of fun."

Well, you've obviously never heard of Mike Murdock.

Another take on Mike.

But do read some of the Frank Miller Daredevils: great pre-Sin-City-just-a-titch-of-noir artwork, some good internal story (lapsed idealist tries to resolve Catholic standards with violent life), and the supporting cast lends a touch of humor.

[Love Rhombus]

And DC's Captain Marvel. He's just a one-trick pony, even blander than Superman, if possible.

[CandidGamera]

Originally Posted by digs

Well, you've obviously never heard of Mike Murdock.

Another take on Mike.

But do read some of the Frank Miller Daredevils: great pre-Sin-City-just-a-titch-of-noir artwork, some good internal story (lapsed idealist tries to resolve Catholic standards with violent life), and the supporting cast lends a touch of humor.

Pass.

[tim314]

Originally Posted by Balance

My preference in superheroes is for those with a very limited power selection, which they gradually learn to use in different ways, or which they must apply in interesting ways to solve problems. If they weren't so profoundly dysfunctional--individually or in groups--the assorted Marvel mutants would probably be my favorites. The mutants generally have only one basic power, or a couple of closely related ones, and either find different ways to use them or team up to get things done. (Okay, they all obviously also have some kind of minor invulnerability, but that sort of goes for everyone in comics.) With his visor, Cyclops can fire huge optic blasts, or a fine cutting beam, but you're never going to see him get out of a pickle by suddenly remembering he can freeze stuff by breathing on it hard.

Of the (powered) DC heroes, the Flash is probably the closest to the ideal. Everything he does is a variation on moving really, really fast, plus the required secondary powers that go with it. I've always liked the Flash.

This is exactly how I feel. One power that the character has to find clever ways to use is much more fun than just having a power for every situation.

That said, good writers can make just about any character interesting, and bad writers can make the best characters boring.

[tim314]

Originally Posted by CandidGamera

Daredevil. I just wonder what the pitch was.

"Okay, he's like Spider-Man, but his life is even worse, and totally devoid of fun."

I always assumed it went something like this:

OK, so he's blind as a bat, but it doesn't matter because he's got this great sonar-like sense!

So what do we call him?

Batman!

Um...

[JohnT]

Spider man has always bored the shit out of me.

[Lochdale]

Batman and any characters without super powers like Hawkeye. I can suspend disbelief for Superman as he's an alien or Thor etc. but Batman et al are boring and take me out of the story. If I could potentially kill them then they shouldn't be in the Avengers or the JLA.

[Bakhesh]

Originally Posted by Lochdale

Batman and any characters without super powers like Hawkeye. I can suspend disbelief for Superman as he's an alien or Thor etc. but Batman et al are boring and take me out of the story. If I could potentially kill them then they shouldn't be in the Avengers or the JLA.

Batman works within the context of the DC universe though, because its not generally know that he hasn't got superpowers. If you lived in a universe where Superman exists, then a weird bat guy who does seemingly impossible things is going to seem plausible. Its only when you put Batman in the real world (like Nolan did) when he becomes a bit ridiculous

[Slade]

Originally Posted by CandidGamera

Daredevil. I just wonder what the pitch was.

I can tell you exactly what the pitch was: "Batman sells well - we need a equivalent of that character."

Hence, Daredevil swings round the city on a rope, fights street-level crime, generally operates at night, lacks any extreme super-powers and tries to look as scary as possible in a vaguely supernatural kind of way. He's Marvel's urban noir cop in longjohns, just as Batman is DC's.

And Thor, of course, is Marvel's Superman.

[Bryan Ekers]

Originally Posted by tim314

I always assumed it went something like this:

OK, so he's blind as a bat, but it doesn't matter because he's got this great sonar-like sense!

So what do we call him?

Batman!

Um...

Funny thing is, there was a crimefighting pulp magazine character called "The Black Bat" who predates Batman by several years, in a short run in 1933-4. The character was revived (and his origin story greatly expanded) in 1939, as a district attorney blinded in an acid attack. Though he eventually gets his sight back after a successful operation (and finds it has improved, letting him see in darkness), while blind he trains his other senses to hyper-acuity. In addition to the obvious influence on DC characters like Two-Face and Doctor Mid-Nite (and arguably Batman, though the matter of who inspired whom was contentious and lawsuits were threatened), the similarity to Daredevil is apparant, too.