The Avengers VS The Dark Knight

[ZaCHw117]

Nope, you're right. A real life Bruce Wayne would likely be too chicken____ and afraid to confront, first hand, the poverty his company created.

If there was a "real life" Bruce Wayne, wouldn't that mean there would be a "real life" Batman?

 

[thenammagazine]

If there was a "real life" Bruce Wayne, wouldn't that mean there would be a "real life" Batman?

If by that you mean a real life vigilante, then yes. But likely a "real" Bruce Wayne would be the cause of the vigilante, not the vigilante himself.

 

[ZaCHw117]

If by that you mean a real life vigilante, then yes. But likely a "real" Bruce Wayne would be the cause of the vigilante, not the vigilante himself.

So you're saying if Bruce Wayne actually existed, than Batman wouldn't his alter ego?

 

[thenammagazine]

So you're saying if Bruce Wayne actually existed, than Batman wouldn't his alter ego?

No. Batman doesn't exist. Get over it. If he did, he'd be like that dork who got his ass kicked in front of the casino. But hey, you could actually be that Batman.

 

[DarkMagic]

This argument still?

That's the reason people like it when they say it's realistic. That word is incorrectly used. It's not realistic in the sense that it could happen. It is realistic in the sense that compared to all other big superhero movies that came before it, it's more believable and takes less imagination to accept.

*snip*

My argument can also be used to defend WB's and Nolan's decision to not continue this series of films and link them to a larger DC continuity. Having Superman and other superpowered beings and aliens would destroy that level of "heightened realism" Nolan used in his movies. Batman becomes less special when he has no super powers in a world filled with super powered beings. In the comics and cartoons, that works for me. It might work in live action film too. But not the Batman Nolan created. I think audiences would have a difficult time accepting aliens in these films suddenly.

*snip*

We're not even arguing really anymore. We agreed that Batman can't exist and we agreed there are different levels of realism in fiction. So... We all agree. Yay.

You seem to have a very similar opinion to mine in this SAME discussion with Nam from a few weeks ago:

Batman, the character in general, and Nolan's Bat-universe specifically are both EXAGGERATIONS (read: Not EXACTLY like real life) of things that have happened in real life. Superman, on the other hand, is on another level of fantasy.

You seem to be arguing against the straw man position that Nolan's Batman world = an exact fascimile of the real world...a position that is easily shut down. Since the situations in Nolan's Bat-universe obviously don't match real life--to the letter--we can dismiss the whole thing as fantasy with no rules or boundaries. And everyone knows there are simply only two levels, right? Absolutely no room for different levels of exaggerated reality and gradients, right? Just REAL and NOT REAL.

We live in the EXACTLY REAL. Everything else that isn't EXACTLY like this lives in the ABSOLUTELY NOT REAL.

Since both Nolan's Batman and the idea of Superman cannot fit perfectly in the EXACTLY REAL category, we've got to lump them into the only other possibility that remains, the ABSOLUTELY NOT REAL.

Look! They're in the same category! They should be in the same "anything goes" universe!

Let me know if I've misrepresented your position.

 

[ZaCHw117]

No. Batman doesn't exist. Get over it. If he did, he'd be like that dork who got his ass kicked in front of the casino. But hey, you could actually be that Batman.

So you're saying that if Batman, from the movies or comics actually existed, he'd get his ass kicked in front of a casino? Despite all of his training?

 

[thenammagazine]

 

[ZaCHw117]

So what you're saying, is that you have no way of explaining how a "real life" batman from the comics or films would get his ass kicked in front of a casino?

 

[thenammagazine]

So what you're saying, is that you have no way of explaining how a "real life" batman from the comics or films would get his ass kicked in front of a casino?

See UFC reference to answer this question. What I'm saying is I'm on to your little scheme lol) of just continually trolling with redundant, repetative questions when your point is irrevocably disproven.

 

[ZaCHw117]

See UFC reference to answer this question. What I'm saying is I'm on to your little scheme lol) of just continually trolling with redundant, repetative questions when your point is irrevocably disproven.

So, Nam. What your implying is that for me to go back to your UFC reference, about one so-called "ninja" who is not a "real life" Bruce Wayne, therefore can, and would get his ass kicked in front of a casino. Unlike if a "real" Bruce Wayne and his alter ego Batman from the comics or films who had real training. Right?

You have no out-holes outta this debate here.

 

[thenammagazine]

So, Nam. What your implying is that for me to go back to your UFC reference, about one so-called "ninja" who is not a "real life" Bruce Wayne, therefore can, and would get his ass kicked in front of a casino. Unlike if a "real" Bruce Wayne and his alter ego Batman from the comics or films who had real training. Right?

You have no out-holes outta this debate here.

Your consolation prize:

 

[DarkMagic]

Careful Zach, you're on the right track with this point here:

A billionaire fighting crime is much more plausible than a Greek god riding a rainbow bridge down to earth because he was banished for starting a fight with big blue pissed off avatars.

--but later Nam deflects and muddles the issue by focusing on details of how to "realistic" Batman is relative to our reality. Nam wants you to get tangled in an argument about the details of Batman.

Of course you wouldn't see the "real" batman. He's a ninja, and definitely wouldn't be going out during a day unless completely necessary. Especially without his gadgets.

Ninjas don't exist anymore. Watch UFC 1. A blackbelt in ninjitsu got his ass kicked by a kickboxer. That put an end to any believability regarding the "martial arts" aspect of ninjas.

If he can show some detail is not EXACTLY like real life (which isn't difficult to do), he can trump that as "proof" that Batman is just as unrealistic as Thor, Superman, etc. When given only a binary choice: REAL or NOT REAL, of course Batman is in the same NOT REAL category as the Avengers, Superman, etc.

But, and this is the point that Nam doesn't seem to want to address,....what if we allow for more subtleties and distinction between different levels of "realism/unrealism" in fiction? If we grant that both Batman and Thor are unrealistic relative to our reality...then what about relative to each other? What if we allow for different levels of "unrealistic"? Is a man that swings on a rope and knows a lot of martial arts on the SAME LEVEL of "unrealistic" as a man that flies and has a magic hammer?

 

[thenammagazine]

But, and this is the point that Nam doesn't seem to want to address,....what if we allow for more subtleties and distinction between different levels of "realism/unrealism" in fiction? If we grant that both Batman and Thor are unrealistic relative to our reality...then what about relative to each other? What if we allow for different levels of "unrealistic"? Is a man that has an unbreakable, infinity-lengh mini grapple launcher that clings to everything and knows a lot of proven ineffective martial arts on the SAME LEVEL of "unrealistic" as a man that flies and has a magic hammer?

But what you're failing to realize is that fiction is fiction, whether in part or in whole. Batman is no more or less realistic than say Captain America. Instead you guys are pettily arguing that Batman is "more realistic" than Avengers which is silly nonsense given none of the characters (with maybe the exception of Hawkeye and Nolan's Joker - though even that's a far reach), can exist in the real world. Instead you're grasping at extreme comparisons to prove an irrelevant point.

 

[IrishJedi]

But what you're failing to realize is that fiction is fiction, whether in part or in whole. Batman is no more or less realistic than say Captain America. Instead you guys are pettily arguing that Batman is "more realistic" than Avengers which is silly nonsense given none of the characters (with maybe the exception of Hawkeye and Nolan's Joker - though even that's a far reach), can exist in the real world. Instead you're grasping at extreme comparisons to prove an irrelevant point.

What I want to know is the point they're trying to make here.

So, Nolan's Batman is less fantastical and closer to realism than other comic book movie heroes. So what? Is your assertion that this makes them "better" and more relevant somehow?

 

[thenammagazine]

What I want to know is the point they're trying to make here.

So, Nolan's Batman is less fantastical and closer to realism than other comic book movie heroes. So what? Is your assertion that this makes them "better" and more relevant somehow?

I think the point is, deep down, they think they can be Batman. But swap the bra ads out for a TDK Official Movie Guide and their future only holds....

 

[Alex Logan]

Uh, yeah, pretty much. But that's not the only thing.

And that's why the character is fictional, and not realistic. A lot of real people have lost their parents at a young age or been through other terrible tragedies. How many of them have taken to dressing up as an animal-themed vigilante? That's right, none, because you'd have to be pretty damned bonkers... no matter how much money and resources you had.

And that's just on a surface level. For a person to be as fundamentally driven and focused as Batman is on fighting crime they would absolutely be sociopathic and unable to function in other areas of their lives. If Batman were realistic, he'd be more like Rorschach... a loner who is so driven by his quest for justice he might be losing touch with reality. He'd be completely anti-social, probably wouldn't even bathe, etc. To be as absolutely dedicated to a single purpose as Batman is a real person would lose touch with pretty much everything else.

And then there is the trauma of seeing and enduring the stuff Batman deals with on a daily basis. That alone would send an actual person straight to the loony bin. At best, they'd have severe Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, which would almost surely lead to many other conditions. He would completely snap. And pretty quickly.

So, yeah... no, Batman is not the least bit realistic even on a personal level.

And that's fine. I love the character. Absolutely one of my favorites. But I know it's fantasy, even in its very notion.

I understand your points. However, without going though the exact same things as the character or being a very experienced psychologist, I don't think you can make a judgement on how a person would turn out if they did go though such things.

No. This is a central theme about Batman and him being the flipside of the Joker. Each has their mental disorders and each manifests differently.

Its like the old adage of the hero and the coward. Both feel the exact same way in battle, one runs one way one runs the other.

If you've had much experience with the batman character and this doesn't sink in, you're probably never going to get it and should just enjoy hime being "AWESOME". Biff! Pow! Wow his teeth are nice!

Gonna have to disagree with you here. The idea that I don't get Batman is ridiculous. The character is much deeper then you've given him credit for.

Unrealistic is unrealistic.

Batman (even Nolan's) is also fantasy. "Yeah, but it's not as much of a fantasy as Hulk!" Do you even realize how silly this sounds?

This "debate" is futile. It's all fake.

And this is the greatest point to be made. Batman is the most realistic comic book character. Nolan took that character and made him as realistic as he could. Everyone here knows this. They know what Nolan has done. They also know that Iron Man is more realistic then The Incredible Hulk and they know that Nolan's Batman is more realistic then Burton's Batman. The realistic argument is simply a springboard to start a fight and it is futile.

 

[DarkMagic]

But what you're failing to realize is that fiction is fiction, whether in part or in whole. Batman is no more or less realistic than say Captain America. Instead you guys are pettily arguing that Batman is "more realistic" than Avengers which is silly nonsense given none of the characters (with maybe the exception of Hawkeye and Nolan's Joker - though even that's a far reach), can exist in the real world. Instead you're grasping at extreme comparisons to prove an irrelevant point.

No, I'm not failing to realize that. Like I said, given a binary choice of ONLY two options: "REAL" or "NOT REAL", (or, in your words "fiction is fiction") obviously Batman and all other superheroes go into the "NOT REAL" / "fiction" category.

What about relativity? Gradients? Is ALL fiction so black and white in your eyes? If so, fine. By that logic, a movie like "The Departed" (with no leaps of physics, no superpowered or magical characters....is exactly as "ficticious" as "The Avengers).

What I want to know is the point they're trying to make here.

So, Nolan's Batman is less fantastical and closer to realism than other comic book movie heroes. So what? Is your assertion that this makes them "better" and more relevant somehow?

Exactly. The bolded part is the point, period. Which is "better" comes down to personal preference.

 

[Alex Logan]

Ninjas don't exist anymore. Watch UFC 1. A blackbelt in ninjitsu got his ass kicked by a kickboxer. That put an end to any believability regarding the "martial arts" aspect of ninjas.

Ninjitsu is not a fighting art. It deals with unconventional and guerrilla warfare. Someone who trains in that art would always lose against some who kicks and strikes. They also don't wear "belts". Anyone who tells you different doesn't know what the hell they are talking about.

And the guys in those videos have never trained in martial arts. It's pretty clear when the first guy starts waving his arms around. They're both just jackasses.

 

[ZaCHw117]

There are different characters and stories based in different levels of fiction. Yes, Batman (no matter in what incarnation) IS fiction. Same with the Avengers, but to ignore the fact that something like

this:

Is just as realistic or fictional as this:

Would be you blatantly lying to yourself to make you feel your point is being proven right.

 

[Niltusk]

Gonna have to disagree with you here. The idea that I don't get Batman is ridiculous. The character is much deeper then you've given him credit for.

You obviously have no idea what depth even means, considering his lifes devotion and the way it was shaped. In every media his problem psyche has been a running issue. So, yes, I'll stick to my opinion that your opinion is a simpleton's