Greatest Superhero Movies of All Time

You don't need superpowers as a prerequisite to perform, let alone identify as a superhero. In the case of the anti-hero, The Punisher, what makes him super is his ability to take on impossible feats, which includes superhuman characters, without having an army behind him. That's the whole point that you're completely ignoring and being disingenuous on.

I'm aware of The Punisher, unlike you, but I'm also more aware on what makes a character, super.

This site here, provided gives greater information. Nick Fury actually classified him as a power level 6, which is...wait for it...virtually superhuman.

 

Also, I will refer to something else to further illustrate my point. Good ol' Wikipedia footnotes, where the sources come from...

Definition of Superhero

And notice the numbers in the brackets? They will automatically take you to the bottom, showing the footnotes. In this case...

Now, let us observe the footnote...

Per sources including
Niccum, John (March 17, 2006). "'V for Vendetta' is S for Subversive". Lawrence Journal-World (Lawrence, Kansas). Archived from the original on November 14, 2014.
Gesh, Lois H.; Weinberg, Robert (2002). "The Dark Knight: Batman: A NonSuper Superhero". The Science of Superheroes (PDF). John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-471-02460-6. Archived from the original on November 18, 2014.
Lovece, Frank (July 16, 2008). "The Dark Knight". (movie review) Film Journal International. Archived from the original on November 7, 2014. Batman himself is an anomaly as one of the few superheroes without superpowers…
While the Dictionary.com definition of "superhero" is "A figure, especially in a comic strip or cartoon, endowed with superhuman powers and usually portrayed as fighting evil or crime," the longstanding Merriam-Webster dictionary gives the definition as "a fictional hero having extraordinary or superhuman powers; also : an exceptionally skillful or successful person".

In other words, I've been making this case the whole time, thus I'm in the right, and you, while merely reiterating my points, either unknowingly, or unaware, while trying to point to the opposing argument, are wrong.

 

So websters dictionary is wrong.

Just because u are good with a gun doesnt make u super.

U cant make your own definitions to fit your agenda or purpose.
You can say a person is ignorant all day...it does change the definition of the word

 

So you're arguing to save face or out of desperation? Suggesting that it is wrong? On who's account? Yours? Because I've proven you wrong, you insist that NOW, the very dictionary you referenced is not right? I'm really questioning why the hell you even try and make a point here when you're running yourself in circles. You're guilty of the very thing you're accusing people, who have academia and greater knowledge on words than you, of...

...and that sort of disingenuous behavior would suit you in politics, but don't fool me and you can't fool me. You've been caught with lying to yourself.

 

Actually u made my point. In the wiki u cited ...it used words such as "most"and modern definition.

In other words....the orginators called them by their properterms fitting them and any person who use the dictionary would apply the words accordingly.




By most definitions, characters do not require actual supernatural or superhuman powers or phenomena to be deemed superheroes,[1] although terms such as costumed crime fighters, costumed adventurers or masked vigilantes are sometimes used to refer to those such as Batman....

 

Actually, you've proven my point, but thanks for trying to reverse your own thoughts to save face. As most, or as the majority, with the dissenters being those who compartmentalize or pigeonhole the definition of superhuman or superhero, as the minority...this case proves that I'm actually correct in the assessment. And ignoring the other tidbits is highly incredulous, and downright foolish.

When the dissenting offer their perspective, they are the ones who are trying to change the definition to fit, or suit their own needs. In this case, you are doing that very thing.

 

For a person who calls chris a fictional character..u are getting butt hurt over a comic book character everyone knows dont exist.

Lol

Even in your own wiki doesnt totally agree with you (if at all)

Heres the full definition and their example

:a fictional hero having extraordinary or superhuman powers; also :an exceptionally skillful or successful person
Examples
The people who do this dangerous work are real-life superheroes who deserve our gratitude.


So they even compared human beings live being to comic book characters as i did with die hard....thus you are getting desperate

Even the dictionary u cited agrees with me.

So super and superheroe definitions are extremely in line with me

 

Was even more funny in your own posts...u are having doubt in yourself

 

How dare that goodlove use real definitions from real words to define imaginary characters.

 

Avengers
The Dark Knight
Captain America 2
Xmen 2, First Class, Days of Futures Past
Guardians Of Galaxy
Mystery Men

 

Spider-Man 3 (the Venom one in case I got the number wrong)
The Wolverine
The Dark Knight

 

The first post here automatically demonstrates that you've lost the argument. When you have nothing left to contribute, you would often retreat to ghetto-esque retorts because you have the inability to even speak with coherent speech patterns, which is common on your end, and reflective on the way you articulate yourself vocally.

Just because you're on the losing end, it doesn't mean you have to resort to childish bantering. Remember, you kept going back and forth with me, knowing very well you had little to contribute, let alone argue on. You insist on getting an answer out of confirmation bias, and with little support, and expect me to just simply cave in, but that's not the case. I've already addressed and countered your petty responses.

Sounds like the one being butt-hurt is you.

 

This post makes no sense whatsoever. I've heard a better argument coming from a Confederate apologist than this...monkeyshine.

 

Oh really....you need to back tovyour posts and read how refine u were. Call people ignirant and ect. When they have different opinionis than u.

So educated arent u?

Go back and look in your long dissertations where u threw all the insults and i didnt until now.



So u can dish it out but cant take it.

Lol....

Truly U cant handle a discussion.

 

It does....when u have no logic....try to dazzle with longwinded bs and insults.

 

I call it as I see it. I cannot apologize if you've grown too hurt over your own incredulous responses just to simply argue. I cannot apologize for the low tolerance towards your arrogant and questionable behavior. I've already addressed those points and you've only reiterated everything I said regarding this subject, and yet you continue to press it on, without even bothering to read carefully or realize that the definition of superhero is not immutable, as since comics expanded over the years, the characters and what defines them in the long run isn't limited to superpowers.

 

That's you in a nutshell. The mirror speaks many truths.

 

Go back and read your posts from the beginning and all the way thru.....

Who were throwing insults from the beginning?

 

Quit deflecting. You've already been caught with your pants down, so end this before you make yourself look even more foolish.

 

Oh so now you read your own stuff and you saw how you were acting....but im deflecting..

---------------------------------

..lol..now you want to try to have an adult convo ?

Im very rite...hes not a super hero.