Do you prefer more traditonal heroes or darker, anti-heroes? Why?

A classic hero who has to get his hands dirty but his heart remains noble. Like Captain America.

Traditional.

Flash, Green Lantern, Superman, Nightwing etc.

That's not to say I don't like anti-heroes. Scarlet Spider (Kaine) is one of my favorite Marvel characters.

I usually prefer anti-heroes as characters, but traditional heroes, when handled well, make for very interesting stories. Especially when their morals are challenged.

Action comics #775 is one of my favorite Superman stories for this reason.

Both.

Darker heroes have the slight edge with me, I like gritty characters but I do think you've got to have a balance.

Depends on the character.

I know this sounds like a cop out, but I sincerely love both equally.

Naw, n!gga, same with me.

My of my two favorite (american) comic book characters are pretty opposite from each other.

I like my heroes to put morality first but aren't boy scouts who were their hearts on their sleeves.

I want the heros to kill

I really like a good mix of all 3. Although you can't go wrong with Black Adam and Red Hood.

Darker anti- hero like Green Arrow, Deadpool Black Canary, Wolverine, Batman

Mostly it depends on which character they use. Like Spider-Man and Superman to be traditional, while Batman and Daredevil should be dark.

Why is that, if you don't mind me asking?

Curious about something then. You enjoy seeing the more traditional heroes have their morals challenged. What's your favorite aspect of the darker ones who don't really have difficult morals?

What do you think of such characters who do wear their hearts on their sleeves? Do you find them "boring?"

So you wouldn't want Spider-Man to act more like Scarlet Spider or Superman to be the type to constantly feel like he's ever so close to snapping and taking over/destroying the planet because he feels no real connection...or something? Does that appeal to you or nay, and if so, why or why not?

Likewise, you wouldn't want Batman to be the type to smile, shake hands, and welcome people to the Hall of Justice, correct? And if I am indeed correct, would you be willing to explain why?

Depends. I am a massive fanboy of Dick Grayson and Jason Todd.

I like them all really, just depends if they're written well or not.

This. And dark anti-heroes are a very old tradition.

I'm probably going to harass you so feel free to stop me at any time, if you feel I'm asking too many questions.

Do you feel like the fact that sometimes, because plot conveniences happen, it lessons what heroes typically do when they "do the right thing?" And do you think comics should try to be more realistic in the sense of how characters should handle things? Even if they themselves are unrealistic?

Aren't traditionally moral heroes also an old tradition?

Both

I've always been a fan of the darker anti-heroes.

Realistic heroes

Well my favorite hero is Superman and my second favorite hero is Wolverine so I think it's safe to say I don't have a preference

I like both, especially if it's a team. It should have one character that's a traditional hero and is the moral compass, one hero who's really dark and will get his/her hands dirty for the team, and then a couple inbetweeners.

I think that's a fair assumption. What do you think when you see these instances though, where Superman does cross the line (so like 90% of elseworlds stories,) or when Spider-Man does so?

Do you think that being a more flexible type of character it gives an advantage when storytelling and generally makes for a more interesting character/story, or do you feel that you can have a fun story with either type of character depending on the writer?

Could you name a team that best represents this dynamic, maybe?

Realistic in what ways?

@scouterv: Heroes that don't conform rigidly to an unrealistic and unhelpful moral standard that doesn't exist in real life. (except Superman)

As long as the story is good, I don't care what kind of hero it features.

Curious what you mean by "unhelpful" moral standard. I mean, I'm going to just use the typical "Most people are decent at heart," moral, but would you call that unrealistic? And why? I mean, if you look, there are plenty of small victories for the good guys all the times. They just don't really get publicized as much as the bad does.

And consider this. You prefer to read about more realistic heroes, but the medium choice is pretty unrealistic. Even their best humans are highly unrealistic. Isn't that a bit odd. Especially since one would think people read comics to get away from reality, rather than have more of it.

And why should only Superman get a pass on having that type of mentality? Because he was the first? Why shouldn't he have to conform to a more realistic sense of morality like everyone else possibly would.

By the way, sorry if it comes off like I'm attacking you. Just genuinely curious.

Sick of fake moral sh!t.

depends on many factors like the story, how they're written i couldn't care less if they have an unrealistic moral compass or would kill anyone and should be considered a villain, as long as they're written and handled well in a story that makes sense an doesn't leave me cringing thats fine by me

@scouterv: Batman allowing the Joker to exist and continue to kill hundreds is unhelpful. Captain America committing blindly to his code even though to follow through would mean the death of two universes is unhelpful.

"Getting away from reality" doesn't mean reading about unrealistic characters, it means I get to read about say a detective. Now detectives are real people that do real things and for that little while I get to be one. I don't read Spider-Man because he's a superhero, I read Spider-Man because it's a coming-of-age\slice-of-life story about a guy that just happens to have powers. I read Daredevil because it's stylish noir and an in depth character study, or at least it was anyway.

I say only Superman not because he was the first (because he wasn't) but because having that rock solid moral code makes him standout that much more if everybody else was realistic.

I like a mix of both. I like Punishers outlook on villains (its the most logical approach in a real time situation) But then Punisher doesn't get any good villains because he ends up killing them. Batman doesn't kill his villains so you get a awesome rogues gallery but its just not practical. No sane human being would let the Joker after like the 3rd time he got loose and killed hundreds/thousands.

@scouterv Yes, although if there was something else striking about their personality I wouldn't mind.

I guess Batman is my ideal hero, completely moral but not someone who isn't afraid to get dirty(ish). I don't really favor Batman's moral position because, while I agree with his no-killing rule, I don't like how people believe he is an anti-hero when I just don't see it. Someone like the Punisher is an anti-hero: Batman is fluffy by comparison.

@cloakx14: batman, green arrow, and canary aren't really anti heros

Look at my Avatar? Yeah

it depends on my mood .

sometimes i wanna read flash or spider-man other times the darkness or punisher

A bit of both

What do you mean "fake moral?"

Well, many people claim that a lot of people could have killed Joker, (and let's be honest, he's survived shiz he probably shouldn't have on more than one occasion, and is basically unkillable, though I do see your point.)

I get what you're saying. I guess I tend to disagree, because most of my favorite heroes tend to have some sort of super power or have magic. Not to say that I don't like a typical street-level hero, like a Moon Knight, but my tastes tend to lean towards something different, though I do tend to care about the characters and their own lives more often if it's someone I can relate to, but being relatable was never a big thing for me.

But still, there are characters similar to other characters, that are still great characters in themselves despite taking certain things from other characters. Perhaps having such rock solid morals could also help another character stand out as well, like I think it does with a guy like The Flash.

Funny thing is, I think this is what a lot of people call boring. Despite the fact that I actually agree with you on the subject, I think a lot of people have simply grown tired of seeing certain heroes win because they're so conditioned to think "It's so-and-so. They're not going to lose." It's a problem I think effects most heroes.

I think you've made some great points though regarding the limitations of certain characters and how they might be pushed/held back, and I especially enjoyed your thoughts regarding The Hulk. I don't really read Hulk, but I think you made some interesting points that I enjoyed reading.

To be fair, Bruce often has his sanity called into question (or at least he probably should, given your valid argument.)

That's fair. I suppose I disagree, because I tend to be the type of person to wear my heart on my sleeve, unapologetically, but that's a simple taste thing as far as certain characters go.

And if I had to hazard a guess, people call Batman an anti-hero because he's simply too dark to just be a hero by the typical definition of some, I think.

Superman, Wonder Woman, The Flash, Green Lantern, etc. All have, generally, striking bright colored costumes. Then you have Batman. The brooding vigilante of the night. Just on appearance alone, his costume (if you didn't know him,) doesn't scream hero. He's called himself a symbol of fear. That's...not quite heroic, if you ask me. Throw in that with his overall bad-boy, devil-may-care attitude, I can sort of see where people come from. (Though not nearly as much into those traits as say, Jason Todd.)

@scouterv: It's not really about being streetlevel or anything, I mean I'm a cosmic\sci-fi fanboy but the characters need to act realistic. This is why I love Hickman so much because he writes characters like real people and shows how an unrelenting moral code that never sways can be very harmful.

I really like both but I like the Traditional heroes a bit more.

But I think that that's realistic in itself? Sometimes people are stubborn as hell and will stick to their guns despite the fact that they probably shouldn't, and I can see the appeal in writing people like real people, but a the same time I'm of a mindset that "real people suck."

Not to say there aren't good ones, but morally, a lot of real people that I know kind of suck, and I don't want to read stories about people like them.

@scouterv Oh, it's not about being open, when I say wearing their hearts on their sleeves I'm thinking about people like Superman or, lets imagine, Kisses-Puppies-and-Feeds-the-Poor Man! Those guys just lack the character, and are too lovey-dovey.

Yes, his dark persona isn't really something you would really aspire to be and obviously isn't the ideal of mental well-being but I think calling Batman an anti-hero waters down the term, the mainstream aren't really that familiar with an anti-hero that is actually morally ambiguous.

I like heroes, but I like it when a villain is so evil that he shakes their moral fortitude.

Well written, nuff said.

@scouterv: Well,the biggest problem is that "no killing" rule. If we take rule "we are all equal" as a fact, isnt than better to kill one "equal" to save more "equals". I think that their priority is to guard collective peace as much as they can, and not harm it with need to feed their own ego. That kind of "moral" just dispute superheroes. The thing: " i captured him for 4567... time now, after he killed 123... people, damn im a good guy, i will handle him to police now and they will put him in prison, and i really dont give a f*ck that he will eventually break out of prison and kill more and more people... I did my job and my soul is clear and shiny, i didnt kill noone, and im better than N.N.,N.N. because of that" is really stupid and egocentric. I hope U get it.