Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
So hard to choose!
So hard to choose!
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (March 24th, 2016)
- Thread starter Uncanny Web-Slinger
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2008
- Messages
- 32,452
- Reaction score
- 3,159
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
Yeah, I don't think Scarecrow, Joker or Two-Face is Batman's fault.
Ra's, Bane, Talia and the LoS are though. It's all Wayne Enterprises and Bruce Wayne's doing. The microwave emitter, the Bane-o tumbler, the nuclear energy fusion bomb orb, etc. his incompetence almost blew the city sky high, just because he wanted to pull a Tony Stark and have "clean, renewable energy for everyone!". Worst of all, he left the city in ruins (financially and structurally) just to go cafe hopping in Italy with the chick that desiccated his mother's memory, stole his car and trapped him, almost getting him killed.
Also, if defeating Ra's in Begins didn't stop that stupid league for good, what makes him sure there won't be more nut jobs after Talia? After all, the league goes all the way back to the days of Rome! He understandably underestimated the Joker in Dark Knight because he was still a novice "him again, one man or the entire mob", but then he did the same exact thing with Bane and Talia just thinking he was a mercenary and a business lady! Blake is a dead man and Gotham is doomed (if they aren't already considering they're probably bankrupt).
Yeah, I don't think Scarecrow, Joker or Two-Face is Batman's fault.
Ra's, Bane, Talia and the LoS are though. It's all Wayne Enterprises and Bruce Wayne's doing. The microwave emitter, the Bane-o tumbler, the nuclear energy fusion bomb orb, etc. his incompetence almost blew the city sky high, just because he wanted to pull a Tony Stark and have "clean, renewable energy for everyone!". Worst of all, he left the city in ruins (financially and structurally) just to go cafe hopping in Italy with the chick that desiccated his mother's memory, stole his car and trapped him, almost getting him killed.
Also, if defeating Ra's in Begins didn't stop that stupid league for good, what makes him sure there won't be more nut jobs after Talia? After all, the league goes all the way back to the days of Rome! He understandably underestimated the Joker in Dark Knight because he was still a novice "him again, one man or the entire mob", but then he did the same exact thing with Bane and Talia just thinking he was a mercenary and a business lady! Blake is a dead man and Gotham is doomed (if they aren't already considering they're probably bankrupt).
The Clown Prince of Crime
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
It's Wayne Enterprises fault, but what does that have to do with Bruce Wayne? And the microwave was stolen before he was Batman and he had nothing to do with the company at point. Again, the league of shadows tried to destroy Gotham long before Bruce Wayne was even born...so how is that his fault? You could say that by not killing Ras in the beginning of the film, that led to Ras attacking Gotham, but he still didn't create that problem because that was their plan anyway. I'll give you the bomb in TDKR though...
I'm sure if another nut job shows up in Gotham, he'll come out of retirement like Michael Jordan...I mean, that's the pattern, so given his track record, the "retirement" is temporary, or until something big happens. Yeah, Blake is ****
It's Wayne Enterprises fault, but what does that have to do with Bruce Wayne? And the microwave was stolen before he was Batman and he had nothing to do with the company at point. Again, the league of shadows tried to destroy Gotham long before Bruce Wayne was even born...so how is that his fault? You could say that by not killing Ras in the beginning of the film, that led to Ras attacking Gotham, but he still didn't create that problem because that was their plan anyway. I'll give you the bomb in TDKR though...
I'm sure if another nut job shows up in Gotham, he'll come out of retirement like Michael Jordan...I mean, that's the pattern, so given his track record, the "retirement" is temporary, or until something big happens. Yeah, Blake is ****
GasparZizou
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
I don't see how LoS, Bane and Talia are Batman's fault at all.
I don't see how LoS, Bane and Talia are Batman's fault at all.
The Clown Prince of Crime
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
They're not. He is responsible for giving them a way (bomb) to destroy the city in TDKR, but he's not responsible for their existence or their motivation to destroy Gotham.
They're not. He is responsible for giving them a way (bomb) to destroy the city in TDKR, but he's not responsible for their existence or their motivation to destroy Gotham.
batfan08
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
May I ask why it makes him despicable? Had he not been there in the first place, the city would've been in ruins, anyway. The way I see it, even by being Batman for a short while, Wayne more than fulfilled any civic duty he had to the people of Gotham. Actually, I don't like that, because "duty" implies he had to do something. No, he went above and beyond any moral obligations. The problem is that you can't seem to differentiate the fact that this isn't the Batman you know. Not all interpretations of the character have to meld with the traditional interpretation. So, with that out of the way, how does risking your life three times for a city that's brought you nothing but pain make you a despicable character?
May I ask why it makes him despicable? Had he not been there in the first place, the city would've been in ruins, anyway. The way I see it, even by being Batman for a short while, Wayne more than fulfilled any civic duty he had to the people of Gotham. Actually, I don't like that, because "duty" implies he had to do something. No, he went above and beyond any moral obligations. The problem is that you can't seem to differentiate the fact that this isn't the Batman you know. Not all interpretations of the character have to meld with the traditional interpretation. So, with that out of the way, how does risking your life three times for a city that's brought you nothing but pain make you a despicable character?
batfan08
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
You say that Ra's and the LoS are his fault, but why? Ra's didn't come to Gotham with a personal vendetta against Bruce. The plan, from the word "go," was to take out Gotham, as you could see when they wanted Bruce to lead the League. Plus, I'm pretty sure the microwave emitter was stolen while Bruce was still dead, or too soon after for him to possibly have any part in its existence. If Bruce Wayne died as a child, Gotham would've been ****ed with a capital "F." You can say that Talia and Bane coming for Gotham was his fault, too, since she would have a reason to hate him, but the fact remains that she was still leading the League, and, last time I checked, the next item on their itinerary, that remained unfulfilled, was to destroy Gotham.
You also talk about the League going back to the days of Rome, so why would it matter if Bruce quit or if he died? Eventually, he's going to kick the bucket and either the league's going to win, or someone's going to take his place. As we saw, he chose a replacement. I'm not sure how viable he was as a replacement, but, then, the trilogy wasn't John Blake's story, it was Bruce Wayne's, and his story came to an end.
You say that Ra's and the LoS are his fault, but why? Ra's didn't come to Gotham with a personal vendetta against Bruce. The plan, from the word "go," was to take out Gotham, as you could see when they wanted Bruce to lead the League. Plus, I'm pretty sure the microwave emitter was stolen while Bruce was still dead, or too soon after for him to possibly have any part in its existence. If Bruce Wayne died as a child, Gotham would've been ****ed with a capital "F." You can say that Talia and Bane coming for Gotham was his fault, too, since she would have a reason to hate him, but the fact remains that she was still leading the League, and, last time I checked, the next item on their itinerary, that remained unfulfilled, was to destroy Gotham.
You also talk about the League going back to the days of Rome, so why would it matter if Bruce quit or if he died? Eventually, he's going to kick the bucket and either the league's going to win, or someone's going to take his place. As we saw, he chose a replacement. I'm not sure how viable he was as a replacement, but, then, the trilogy wasn't John Blake's story, it was Bruce Wayne's, and his story came to an end.
batfan08
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
*sigh* Sometimes I need to remind myself not to take things as I read them.
*sigh* Sometimes I need to remind myself not to take things as I read them.
The Clown Prince of Crime
Super Freak
GasparZizou
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
Yeah but he gave them access because Talia tricked him, and if someone can trick Batman, that's Ra's or Talia.
The only genuine ****** move was leaving.
Btw, is it true that Nolan wanted to kill Batman at the end but WB wouldn't let him?
Yeah but he gave them access because Talia tricked him, and if someone can trick Batman, that's Ra's or Talia.
The only genuine ****** move was leaving.
Btw, is it true that Nolan wanted to kill Batman at the end but WB wouldn't let him?
jye4ever
Broke and happy
jye4ever
Broke and happy
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
I have to say, Clown Prince of Belair and fatfan08 put up a decent argument against the mighty Chewfabiobacca.
Taking down Difabio is damn near impossible.
I have to say, Clown Prince of Belair and fatfan08 put up a decent argument against the mighty Chewfabiobacca.
Taking down Difabio is damn near impossible.
batfan08
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
How is leaving a ****** move? Why should deciding to live his life be considered such a bad thing? Did he not save the city three times (that's about three times more than 99.99999% of the rest of the Gothamites would do)? Again, he never had any real reason to do anything for that city. A more well adjusted person would've said "**** this place, I'm moving; too many bad memories," but Bruce didn't. He saved the city, inspired others to try to, as well, and that's all she wrote.
How is leaving a ****** move? Why should deciding to live his life be considered such a bad thing? Did he not save the city three times (that's about three times more than 99.99999% of the rest of the Gothamites would do)? Again, he never had any real reason to do anything for that city. A more well adjusted person would've said "**** this place, I'm moving; too many bad memories," but Bruce didn't. He saved the city, inspired others to try to, as well, and that's all she wrote.
The Clown Prince of Crime
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
I never had a problem with him leaving, but I understand why some people don't like it. It's out of character for him to do something like that in the comics, but the film is not the comics, he wasn't trained by Ra's and the Joker didn't wear makeup ein the comics either, so I don't care. A film is a film and the comics are the comics, two different things.
As far as the ending, I don't know anything about Nolan wanting to kill him. I don't believe there's a script with that ending and the idea of WB wanting him alive could true, but Bale was clear that he was done with Batman, and this was part of what Nolan said about the trilogy in a farewell letter
I never had a problem with him leaving, but I understand why some people don't like it. It's out of character for him to do something like that in the comics, but the film is not the comics, he wasn't trained by Ra's and the Joker didn't wear makeup ein the comics either, so I don't care. A film is a film and the comics are the comics, two different things.
As far as the ending, I don't know anything about Nolan wanting to kill him. I don't believe there's a script with that ending and the idea of WB wanting him alive could true, but Bale was clear that he was done with Batman, and this was part of what Nolan said about the trilogy in a farewell letter
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2008
- Messages
- 32,452
- Reaction score
- 3,159
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
Adam West Batman would have never built a bomb and let the enemy take it over, let alone sleep with the villain. Michael Keaton Batman was so paranoid that he had surveillance systems in every room, went on nightly patrols and didn't trust anyone. Comic Batman would have seen Talia's ruse the minute she started spewing Liam Neeson's ideologies.
Bale Batman had the bomb built and gave it to a random lady he barely knew. He underestimated a villain for the third time, got tricked by an Al Ghul for the second time and had his whole arsenal taken from him. He dun goofed. If it wasn't for magical leg braces, leaflets and stale crackers, he'd have failed the city. Thing is, he clearly had the precaution with the river drowning resort underneath the substation. He should have done that as soon as he got a whiff of Bane and the stock market shenanigans. That's what a real Batman would do.
See, in Begins and early on in the Dark Knight, Bruce is new to the whole Batman thing. He makes mistakes and it makes sense because it's his year one. He has that messy run in with the cops on national television in the Tumbler, he kills (or helps kill) his mentor, he underestimates the Joker and loses his not-girlfriend when he should have went for Dent. By the start of the third act in The Dark Knight though, we get the fully-realized Batman. He's on the top of his game (sonar device, "beautiful, isn't it", "it's not that simple, with the Joker it never is", the hostages and SWAT, etc." We finally have our "Dark Knight" status hero. He gets his license so to speak and all the Playstation achievement trophies.
By TDKR, that all goes to ****. He gets soft, goes into hiding (as Batman and Wayne) and let's a ****ing army build a labyrinth of evil under the city's sewers. He puts his money into a stupid macguffin device that is never used properly, he trusts everyone (Tate, Selina, Blake), he's easily tricked, he treats Bane just like he treated Joker, etc. There's no further development in the character. Instead of progressing, he regresses. We went through two movies of him learning the ropes, only to see that he didn't learn diddly squat and back in a hole again. Then instead of staying and help rebuild Gotham "brick for brick", he leaves to fulfill his gay butler's fantasy of fine Italian cafe hopping while the city struggles to find money to put into rebuilding it's bridges, infrastructure and law enforcement (not to mention all those inmates still on the loose). He was a dummy.
Adam West Batman would have never built a bomb and let the enemy take it over, let alone sleep with the villain. Michael Keaton Batman was so paranoid that he had surveillance systems in every room, went on nightly patrols and didn't trust anyone. Comic Batman would have seen Talia's ruse the minute she started spewing Liam Neeson's ideologies.
Bale Batman had the bomb built and gave it to a random lady he barely knew. He underestimated a villain for the third time, got tricked by an Al Ghul for the second time and had his whole arsenal taken from him. He dun goofed. If it wasn't for magical leg braces, leaflets and stale crackers, he'd have failed the city. Thing is, he clearly had the precaution with the river drowning resort underneath the substation. He should have done that as soon as he got a whiff of Bane and the stock market shenanigans. That's what a real Batman would do.
See, in Begins and early on in the Dark Knight, Bruce is new to the whole Batman thing. He makes mistakes and it makes sense because it's his year one. He has that messy run in with the cops on national television in the Tumbler, he kills (or helps kill) his mentor, he underestimates the Joker and loses his not-girlfriend when he should have went for Dent. By the start of the third act in The Dark Knight though, we get the fully-realized Batman. He's on the top of his game (sonar device, "beautiful, isn't it", "it's not that simple, with the Joker it never is", the hostages and SWAT, etc." We finally have our "Dark Knight" status hero. He gets his license so to speak and all the Playstation achievement trophies.
By TDKR, that all goes to ****. He gets soft, goes into hiding (as Batman and Wayne) and let's a ****ing army build a labyrinth of evil under the city's sewers. He puts his money into a stupid macguffin device that is never used properly, he trusts everyone (Tate, Selina, Blake), he's easily tricked, he treats Bane just like he treated Joker, etc. There's no further development in the character. Instead of progressing, he regresses. We went through two movies of him learning the ropes, only to see that he didn't learn diddly squat and back in a hole again. Then instead of staying and help rebuild Gotham "brick for brick", he leaves to fulfill his gay butler's fantasy of fine Italian cafe hopping while the city struggles to find money to put into rebuilding it's bridges, infrastructure and law enforcement (not to mention all those inmates still on the loose). He was a dummy.
jye4ever
Broke and happy
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
Yeah, screw his parents murder, especially a father with very deep connections to helping Gotham, screw them, I'm going to Italy.
Yeah, screw his parents murder, especially a father with very deep connections to helping Gotham, screw them, I'm going to Italy.
jye4ever
Broke and happy
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
DiFabio whipping out the big guns now, people are going down.
DiFabio whipping out the big guns now, people are going down.
The Clown Prince of Crime
Super Freak
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
That's all very nice, but he still not responsible for creating the League of Shadows, Bane or Talia. He's in no way responsible for their existence or their crazy motivation to destroy Gotham. You can say he made mistakes or that the character or the film wasn't properly written, but the topic or the question was, did he create the villains? And the answer is still no. He did not.
That's all very nice, but he still not responsible for creating the League of Shadows, Bane or Talia. He's in no way responsible for their existence or their crazy motivation to destroy Gotham. You can say he made mistakes or that the character or the film wasn't properly written, but the topic or the question was, did he create the villains? And the answer is still no. He did not.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2008
- Messages
- 32,452
- Reaction score
- 3,159
Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
3 times?
1. It was his family's company's fault, he fixed it and saved the city. He had an obligation to stop it considering he . . . trained with the cult that set out to destroy it and his name built the ****ing thing
2. He didn't do ****. I recall the Joker having Batman in a helpless choke hold while the citizens and inmates on the ferries saved themselves. If he Joker didn't go on about the scars BS, he coulda blown up those ferries
3. All his fault. Let an organization he knew about gain control and gave them his bomb and cars. Saved the city from being blown to smithereens, didn't save it from being cut off from the world for 5 months.
He did give orphans a new place to chill with dat Priest though!
3 times?
1. It was his family's company's fault, he fixed it and saved the city. He had an obligation to stop it considering he . . . trained with the cult that set out to destroy it and his name built the ****ing thing
2. He didn't do ****. I recall the Joker having Batman in a helpless choke hold while the citizens and inmates on the ferries saved themselves. If he Joker didn't go on about the scars BS, he coulda blown up those ferries
3. All his fault. Let an organization he knew about gain control and gave them his bomb and cars. Saved the city from being blown to smithereens, didn't save it from being cut off from the world for 5 months.
He did give orphans a new place to chill with dat Priest though!
Similar threads
