Skip to main content

marvel - In Back In Black, did the Kingpin really underestimate Spider-man in a pure hand-to-hand fight?



In the Back In Black story arc (right after the Civil War), I understand that Peter's probably never been this angry before, but wouldn't Fisk (Kingpin) have anticipated an epic beatdown? The way he carried himself (confidence, putting on his suit) before the fight inside the prison, you'd have thought that one of the most well prepared criminal masterminds would have had a trick up his sleeve rather than take on a rage-driven Peter in a fight. I was almost expecting him to let Peter know that there's another sniper with Mary Jane in the cross-hairs in the middle of the fight.


Nopes, that didn't happen. Fisk actually wanted a fair fight against a person who far outclasses him in the strength and agility department.


What followed was probably the worst beatdowns Fisk ever experienced (including the ones against Daredevil).



Have previous encounters (where Peter is known to always pull his punches) given Wilson Fisk such a false impression? Or is there something more going on here?



Answer



One of the issues with comics is the fluctuating levels of strength characters display. This is true for Kingpin and Spider-Man, as it is true for all other comic book characters.


In the past, there have been previous occasions where the two have battled and Kingpin has fared quite well in hand-to-hand combat with Spider-Man. In some instances, Kingpin has actually won.


It's important to remember that Spider-Man is typically not a brutal fighter. He works hard to incapacitate his enemies. This is the Spider-Man Fisk is the most familiar with, and was likely expecting to battle. It's arguable that Fisk is not aware that Spider-Man is typically holding back. Back In Black, however, saw Peter Parker in rare form - one fueled by anger. He was a more brutal fighter, and generally doing things that Peter would not normally do - things like breaking hands and arms of low level thugs. The situation was exacerbated by Fisk taunting the already enraged Spider-Man during the battle.


As the fight draws on, Fisk starts noticing that Spider-Man is fighting differently.



Something seems... different.


Spider-Man explains to him that he's abandoning all his usual rules.


You're confused


Fisk will be killed by Peter Parker, not Spider-Man.


I'm not going to kill you. I am. Wait. What?


Fisk now understands the gravity of the situation. Spider-Man/Peter is fighting unlike he's ever fought before.


Oh, crap. What did I do?


click for bigger so you can actually read the text


Maybe this was a bad idea.


Spider-Man doesn't kill; he incapacitates. But Peter is ready to make an exception.



What happened to your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man?


Fisk underestimated Spider-Man, because Spidey fought in a manner and on a level that he normally never fights on.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize Missy right away?

So after it was established that Missy is actually both the Master, and the "woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS number... ...why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize her right away? I remember the Tenth Doctor in The Sound of Drums stating that Timelords had a way of recognizing other Timelords no matter if they had regenerated. And Clara should have recognized her as well... I'm hoping for a better explanation than "Moffat screwed up", and that I actually missed something after two watchthroughs of the episode. Answer There seems to be a lot of in-canon uncertainty as to the extent to which Time Lords can recognise one another which far pre-dates Moffat's tenure. From the Time Lords page on Wikipedia : Whether or not Time Lords can recognise each other across regenerations is not made entirely clear: In The War Games, the War Chief recognises the Second Doctor despite his regeneration and it is implied that the Doctor knows him when they fir

the lord of the rings - Why is Gimli allowed to travel to Valinor?

Gimli was allowed to go to Valinor despite not being a ring bearer. Is this explained in detail or just with the one line "for his love for Galadriel"? Answer There's not much detail about this aside from what's said in Appendix A to Return of the King: We have heard tell that Legolas took Gimli Glóin's son with him because of their great friendship, greater than any that has been between Elf and Dwarf. If this is true, then it is strange indeed: that a Dwarf should be willing to leave Middle-earth for any love, or that the Eldar should receive him, or that the Lords of the West should permit it. But it is said that Gimli went also out of desire to see again the beauty of Galadriel; and it may be that she, being mighty among the Eldar, obtained this grace for him. More cannot be said of this matter. And Appendix B: Then Legolas built a grey ship in Ithilien, and sailed down Anduin and so over Sea; and with him, it is said, went Gimli the Dwarf . And when that sh

Did the gatekeeper and the keymaster get intimate in Ghostbusters?

According to TVTropes ( usual warning, don't follow the link or you'll waste half your life in a twisty maze of content ): In Ghostbusters, it's strongly implied that Dana Barret, while possessed by Zuul the Gatekeeper, had sex with Louis Tully, who was possessed by Vinz Clortho the Keymaster (key, gate, get it?), in order to free Big Bad Gozer. In fact, a deleted scene from the movie has Venkman explicitly asking Dana if she and Louis "did it". I turned the quote into a spoiler since it contains really poor-taste joke, but the gist of it is that it's implied that as part of freeing Gozer , the two characters possessed by the Keymaster and the Gatekeeper had sex. Is there any canon confirmation or denial of this theory (canon meaning something from creators' interviews, DVD commentary, script, delete scenes etc...)? Answer The Richard Mueller novelisation and both versions of the script strongly suggest that they didn't have sex (or at the very l

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed.