From the Wayback Machine - Spider-Man vs. Batman

Wrote this when applying for an internship or job in Chicago my senior year of college. One of the topics to chose from was, "Who would win, Batman or Spider-Man?".

I give you ... glorious geekdom.

Three’s S’s of Success for Spider-Man’s Defeat of Batman

or Marvel Will Always Dominate DC Comics

The motivation to become a superhero is similar for Bruce Wayne and Peter Parker. Both lost loved ones, which in turn provided the catalyst for them to pursue a career in crime fighting. Wayne chose to take on the persona of Batman and defend Gotham City after his parents were murdered. New York City native Parker became Spider-Man after being bitten by a radioactive spider and his Uncle Ben’s murder.

Even though Bruce Wayne’s wealth contributes to the Caped Crusader’s crime fighting campaign Spider-Man could still beat Batman because he has superior strength, speed and finally his “spider-sense”.

Peter Parker designed a canister based webbing, as he is a scientist. Bruce Wayne is loaded like Donald Trump which helps his Batman alter ego, because it allows him to make and purchase gadgets to fight crime. The prime example being the Batmobile, the ultimate tricked out ride that would make rapper Xhibit jealous.

Costumes are an important part in the comic world. Spider-Man’s costume is merely fabric covering his true identity (exception being the symbiotic black costume first appearing in Amazing Spider-Man #252) but Batman’s suit is what protects him. His Batsuit offers him the ultimate in protection at a ridiculous, but honorable, expense.

Even with the Batsuit, Spider-Man will defeat the Dark Knight because of his super human strength. Batman is simply a strong human being and there is not a steroid in the world that could enable him to K.O. Spidey. In theory Spider-Man should be able to knockout anyone with one punch unless they are more powerful than him. He would pummel Batman once he caught him and if he had a face shot (as the Batsuit offers protection). Therefore he would have to be quicker than the Dark Knight.

Batman has the ability to get out of tight spots quickly with his utility belt gadgets (ex. a grappling hook). For an ordinary bad-guy or petty crook this would very well spoil their day and give him the advantage but not so versus Spidey. Spider-Man can use his webbing to shoot around in any direction with the press of two fingers. Batman’s martial arts training helps him against others but Spidey would be able to quickly maneuver a defensive or offensive attack. His ability to stick to surfaces means he could leap from point A to B quickly, completely discombobulating the Caped Crusader.

In fact with Peter Parker’s “spider-sense” and his agility he would not only be able to calculate in a split second which way Batman was attacking from but also be able to counterattack. The spider-sense in a way is the factor that seals the deal in defeating Batman as it is the ultimate defense mechanism. It has saved his neck countless times and it will always be the deciding factor in Spidey’s duels, exceptions being Venom or Carnage who don’t trigger it. Whatever Batman launched Spider-man would be able to deflect or avoid, depending on what it may be.

Both heroes avoid the use of guns all together so a battle would be the ultimate prize fight, just a street style prize fight. Batman’s seemingly unlimited supply of gadgets that are used as weapons would make the fight memorable and longer than 10 seconds. A carefully timed attack with a gadget followed by a physical attack would definitely make contact with Spidey but it would not harm him, at least not the physical attack. Even if Batman could keep up with Spider-man he still will never be able to knock him out or cause him much harm using only his bodily abilities because he is too slow. A well launched gadget attack would most likely fail in the long run because of Peter Parker’s fast reacting spider-sense. Once Spider-Man got within punching or kicking range of Batman the fight would be over and Spider-Man would be victorious.

A Beer, a Movie and a Blog v0.3 - "Where The Wild Things Are"

(Warning: Small Spoilers)

I could not stop smiling during this movie.

My eyes smiled. My mouth smiled. My brain smiled. My heart smiled (and teared up a little).

Spike Jonze ("Praise You" "Weapon of Choice") has taken Maurice Sendak's "Where the Wild Things Are" and turned it into a masterpiece that gives depth and backstory to Max and captured (as my friend Landon put it best) " ... that point in life at which a child ceases to define him or herself in entirely selfish terms. Really well.".

The movie is simply brilliant.

Jonze and Dave Eggers screenplay (with Sendak's blessing) took a children's book where a bratty kid escapes in his own imagination to a place where he can run wild and then realize he wants to be home where he is loved and created a film that explains WHY Max is Max and uses the Wild Things as a manifestation of those he knows and his own internal characteristics, strengths, faults, fears and dreams.

It shows the mind of a child and how a child copes and analyzes things within.

This is a character film which asks a 12-year-old actor (and most likely 10-years-old at the time of filming) to carry the brunt of the film upon his own small, young shoulders.

And Max Records does it perfectly, so much so it is evident he IS Max and not just a kid actor told to say this on this cue and be in this mood. He makes this film a success. He makes this film a dare I say masterpiece. He makes this film WORK.

Jonze and Records

The use of Jim Henson's Creature Shop to create the Wild Things (with CGI aiding in the facial expressions some) is AMAZING. You see sand flying. You see dirt impacting them. You see Max form a relationship with Carol and not just a stick with a head on it. The Wild Things are ALIVE. They exist and are running around on their island and play the physical imagination-fueled games children play (with Max's instructing).

Carol (James Gandolfini) and Max

The soundtrack is spot on with the film featuring pretty much only original songs by Karen O And The Kids, similar to the musical mood of the "Garden State" and "Juno".

There are some things I would like to pay a little harder attention to on my next viewing, such as the king discussion at the end and if it is religiously symbolic of simply childish. I would also like to study the different Wild Things characteristics even more and how they relate to Max himself.

Go see "Where the Wild Things Are". Go with some friends. Go enjoy yourself and let the self-introspection, self-evaluation and imagination run wild. Go remember your childhood. Go remember when you had a fort in your bedroom. You will not be disappointed. Just please do not go and expect this to be some children's movie, because it's not.

It's a movie for the wild thing, in all of us.