Batman-"the most realistic" superhero?

[hopefuldreamer]

Originally Posted by November Rain

this conversation isn't about powers which i brought up in my initial posts. It's about character concept.

to which i say superman's character origins are far more realistic.

So your saying that if alien baby landed in a corn field, a nice couple would just take him in and not tell anyone, with no fear for their own safety?

And your saying that if you or I were that alien, having grown up taught to hide for fear of being dissected like a frog if anyone knew about us, it would be perfectly realistic to put on a multi coloured suit and walk around in plain sight letting everyone know we were different?

And your saying that it'd be totally realistic that as soon as that suit came off and we wore a baggy shirt and glasses, no one would recognise us?

I'm sorry, but I can much more easily imagine myself hiding in dark alleyways with hi tech body armour and weapons, because my rich parents were killed by a thug and i'm a bit screwed up about it.

That seems way more believable to me.

Originally Posted by November Rain

how many billion people have lived so far, lived with substantial amounts of wonga who have had tragic upbringings that have committed themselves to a vigilante lifestlye?

zippo.

Hang on a minute... Your comparing a question about how many REAL LIFE Batman's there are...

Originally Posted by November Rain

yet we have stories of outsiders entering basic communities, integrating and ultimately making them better while upholding their beliefs. i.e. hercules, tarzan, dragonball, new adventures of he-man, farscape, buck rogers. it even has its own trope have a look, heck superman even has his own section in it

i mean crumbs, the moses story in the bible is pretty much superman's. I'm not going to get into whether the bible is real or not but there are more examples of this in 'historical' literature than batman's.

... And using a statement about Superman like characters in FICTION to try and make this arguement?

Yes, Superman fits an archetype more common in fiction.

What does that have to do with whether or not his origin is more realistic?

It just means there have been a lot of very unrealistic stories about people from other worlds coming to help us.

Originally Posted by November Rain

this is my point. I don't know why you are glossing over it and concentrating on aspects of the characters which are irrelevant to them. If clark's kryptonian nature gave him no powers what so ever, he'd still be more realistic.

If Clark had no powers, he wouldn't be a superhero.

He'd probably just be a journalist.

But he'd be fighting injustice with his journalism. He'd be as much of a hero as Lois basically.

So I don't see how your statement makes sense.

Originally Posted by November Rain

the only issue per say is whether or not his intergration into the human race as a child would make him more/less dedicated to the cause or not (i mean if he had come later on, it may have made a difference on his outlook).

I'd say his outlook on humanity, having grown up raised as a human, taught good human moral values, is actually one of the more realistic things about him.

But even that depends on the interpretation.

Because some people think he sees himself as a human with powers, and some people think he sees himself as a krytonian among humans.

I'd say the former is more realistic when he arrived as a child, but the latter would be his outlook if he remembered his world. Kind of like Kara I guess.

[November Rain]

suicide, you are getting wrapped up in details here.

your first line equates to a family taking in an outsider no questions asked. Yes, that is a believable trait.

your second line refers to being feared for an outsider, you still use your talents to rise above the ranks. yes, that too is a believable trait.

suits irrelevant and I'm a personal believer any sort of secret identity would be mute as well. it's almost impossible. But my discussion was never based on identities.

and again, how many wealthy individuals have had childhood tragedy in their lives and have decided to deal with them in a vigilante based lifestyle?

In the same way as you say, if clark had no powers, he would be a journalist (which is debatable but is possible and IS realistic), a powerless bruce is no more likely to be a superhero than clark kent is. As grounded each one of bruce's unique traits seem to be to acquire on paper, the mentality to become a 'batman' and the amalgamation of these skilss is probably one of the most far fetched things to want to pull off.

and yes, i use the numbers game because there is nothing stopping a batman from have occurred, his tragedy and money influence are not unique to him alone. Yet he stands alone.

batman in parts is very realistic but the full combination isn't, as there would have been at least one permutation of it in history so far and there's yet to be one established.

The reason i think the superman archtype is more realistic is because it's easily replicable. take a high end teacher going into a poor neighbourhood school and becoming its best teacher and winning the respect of the students. Or a volunteer who winds up in a native village and decides to stay and become its ambassordor. or high end meat eaters who become vegans and fight to save the planet. the superman archetype is quite grounded when you look at it from that point of view. remember scale plays no part in my discussion. so while i may give fictional examples, there are thousands of real life ones i could give as well.

so the supes mythos is simply a scaled up version of what normal proactive people in different cultures do on an everyday basis to enhance said culture.

and that's what makes it more realistic.

personally i think clark became a journalist because that would fit his hero ethos. had he had no powers, he would have maybe become a motivational speaker or writer/ something along those lines. Maybe even a politician.

as for clark, i think he is both a human on earth and also kryptonian among humans. As a dual heritage individual, i walk similar lines, feeling like an african in western society and also a westerner in african societies. how he feels depends on his surroundings and his company. like clark at work is different to clark with lana etc. same with spokesperson superman is very different to supes when hes speaking to wonderwoman and bats.

there's nothing wrong with having both together as we are never just one thing and again, that helps with his realism.

[hopefuldreamer]

Originally Posted by November Rain

suicide, you are getting wrapped up in details here.

your first line equates to a family taking in an outsider no questions asked. Yes, that is a believable trait.

I disagree.

I do not believe that a family finding a small child, would basically abduct him without informing the authorities... Unless they weren't very nice people.

And if they were the kind of people who go around abducting babies, I hardly think he'd have grown up in an environment of good morals.

Originally Posted by November Rain

your second line refers to being feared for an outsider, you still use your talents to rise above the ranks. yes, that too is a believable trait.

We're not talking about a little bit of racial prejudice fear.

We're talking about overcoming a lifetime of hiding your talents because you feel there is no doubt people would capture and experiment on you if you told them what you really were.

It'd be like walking around in Nazi Germany with a big sign around your neck saying 'I'm a jew'.

It just isn't realistic.

Originally Posted by November Rain

suits irrelevant and I'm a personal believer any sort of secret identity would be mute as well. it's almost impossible. But my discussion was never based on identities.

You discussion seems to leave out everything that doesn't suit your arguement.

For your arguement to have any validation, we have to not talk about powers, aliens... And now secret identities?

*sigh*

Originally Posted by November Rain

and again, how many wealthy individuals have had childhood tragedy in their lives and have decided to deal with them in a vigilante based lifestyle?

In the same way as you say, if clark had no powers, he would be a journalist (which is debatable but is possible and IS realistic), a powerless bruce is no more likely to be a superhero than clark kent is. As grounded each one of bruce's unique traits seem to be to acquire on paper, the mentality to become a 'batman' and the amalgamation of these skilss is probably one of the most far fetched things to want to pull off.

and yes, i use the numbers game because there is nothing stopping a batman from have occurred, his tragedy and money influence are not unique to him alone. Yet he stands alone

batman in parts is very realistic but the full combination isn't, as there would have been at least one permutation of it in history so far and there's yet to be one established.

Every single thing in life is subjective to me.

How Batman comes about is a confluence of event that are completely unique. Take out any of the aspects and you might not have gotten Batman. True.

I don't know how many insanely wealthy western orphans, have been left with only a butler to raise them.

I tell you what, if you can find ONE, then we can discuss whether those examples are comparable.

But even then, I'm sure there are enough differences for us to be able to say it's not exactly the same, which is WHY the same outcome is not achieved.

Something doesn't have to have happened exactly that way before, for it to be feesible.

You just have to say 'Can this logically happen'.

And of all the Superheroes, I'd say Batman is the most feesible'.

Like I said, the combination of experiences, skills, abilities and financial backing would be a very rare ocurrance. Which is why we have no real world examples running around.

But it COULD happen.

The combination of coincidences that have to occur in order for YOU to have been born are a miracle. But your not unrealistic... Obviously... Your here

Originally Posted by November Rain

The reason i think the superman archtype is more realistic is because it's easily replicable. take a high end teacher going into a poor neighbourhood school and becoming its best teacher and winning the respect of the students. Or a volunteer who winds up in a native village and decides to stay and become its ambassordor. or high end meat eaters who become vegans and fight to save the planet. the superman archetype is quite grounded when you look at it from that point of view. remember scale plays no part in my discussion. so while i may give fictional examples, there are thousands of real life ones i could give as well.

Again I don't think your arguement is fair.

Your saying Batman is unrealistic because no one out there is exactly the same and has done what he's done.

But Superman is realistic because a teacher from another country could come in and impress a bunch of students.

The situations you've given are not comparable.

And it seems like your employing a double standard.

Originally Posted by November Rain

so the supes mythos is simply a scaled up version of what normal proactive people in different cultures do on an everyday basis to enhance said culture.

and that's what makes it more realistic.

Well you could apply the same logic to Batman.

He's just a scaled up version of someone who stands up to the school bully after his friend gets hurt by one of their cronies.

Still doesn't prove realism.

Originally Posted by November Rain

personally i think clark became a journalist because that would fit his hero ethos. had he had no powers, he would have maybe become a motivational speaker or writer/ something along those lines. Maybe even a politician

as for clark, i think he is both a human on earth and also kryptonian among humans. As a dual heritage individual, i walk similar lines, feeling like an african in western society and also a westerner in african societies. how he feels depends on his surroundings and his company. like clark at work is different to clark with lana etc. same with spokesperson superman is very different to supes when hes speaking to wonderwoman and bats.

there's nothing wrong with having both together as we are never just one thing and again, that helps with his realism.

Agree with all of that

[SuperFerret]

I actually made a post about this last night. I'm quoting it here for my argument because I'm lazy.

Originally Posted by SuperFerret

I confess that I hate when people confuse "realistic" with "real". "Realistic" is just something that seems real, but isn't. Honestly, "believable" is a far better word, and takes into consideration the fictitious nature of the world being presented.

For example, take Superman's world and Batman's world as separate entities (not part of the DCU). Superman is inherently more believable because the basis of his world is that there is a god-like alien that exists. Thus all the funny little oddities, such as nobody recognizing Clark because there's no way such a meek guy could possibly be a god-like figure (plus Superman doesn't wear a mask, so he probably doesn't even have a secret identity to reveal) just fall into place and make sense. Batman's world tries to mirror reality, and it does so, aside from the glaring fact that it's near impossible for someone (even someone as wealthy and dedicated as Bruce is portrayed) to be that adept in so many diverse fields while also being fairly young. Batman might be more "realistic" than Superman, but Superman's unrealistic nature makes him and his world more believable.

I hope that made some sense, as it's 2:30am and I'm going to bed.

Basically, Batman's "realism" makes him less believable, while Superman's "unrealism" makes him more believable.

[November Rain]

suicide, for the last three or four posts, i keep saying i'm looking at the concept archtype and you keep bringing back specific storyline specifics.

how can we have any sort of discussion when you keep looking at the finer details of a single fictional story detail and i keep looking at the larger scale trope of the character.

your batman argument to putting together high levels of probability in order to come up with the unique traits that produce bruce wayne is very reminscent of the physics experiment which showed technically if you shot a tank bullet into a sheet of paper, there is a possibility it would bounce off. you would therefore recommend building armour out of paper based on this notion as a realistic approach to protecting yourself.

that superman idealogy would be like wearing some sort of vest which may not be completely bullet proof but could save your life 4/10 and has been shown to save people's lives outside of an laboratory experiment.

if you did a normal distribution of people in society and the events leading to a batman were more scarce than the events leading to a superman, wouldn't that mean batman is less realistic?????

batman motif is someone who has been scarred by a traumatic event in his passed loved ones who has isolated himself in order to become the best in his specific field. by using the very tatics that caused the original tragedy itself.

that is completely different to tackling a bully that has bullied your friend. said student would have had to have left the school and this kid would have had to have excelled in every single extra curricular field of study, sports, exams, had the populat girls and completely erradicated bullying at his place, all while having no friends and touring school at night creating pionnering means to stop bullying.

how much harder is that than a new ethnic kid from out of town becoming the most popular and quarterback for the sports team who gets good grades and pulls teh school together??

in all sense, there's no way to quantify the media's response to a unique alien outsider joining us, and also there is a cultural aspect to take into consideration, some cultures may embrace him without any hassle while some may be more scared or skeptical of him. so either your or my situations are very feasible and one isn't necessarily more realistic than the other but mine is still very much possible.





we could be talking about the story of tarzan and you could spend the entire time talking about how impossible it is for humans to talk to animals and derail what i'm trying to present.

you're intelligent enough to know what i'm trying to place infront of you, i am not the person who came up with this concept, this is a well established trope which was established thousands of years before you, i, superman or batman ever existed.

and you know fully well you don't need, costumes, an alien origin, or any of that stuff to be considered a superhero, that's just glaze to make characters stand out on print.

[November Rain]

here is a summation of the batman motif, a simplfied version

the kid with no legs becomes one of the best athlethes in the school and the vice captains of the athletics team WITHOUT doing a single sport.

now is that realistic?

the answers all in this people.

[WildcatNC]

Originally Posted by hopefulsuicide

I don't think he is realistic in every way.

But he is the MOST realistic. I mean, name a superhero who is more realistic!

I'd say the thread title is a bit off.

Punisher.

[November Rain]

meh, a persucuted individual who wants to end up changing the world around him and sets up a sanctuary for others to follow in his footsetsp

charles xavier has a lot of people beat on this one.

infact alot of chatacters have batman beat on this one.

i can think of lots fo realistic comic book characters, actual heroes though is a lil bit trickier.

[hopefuldreamer]

Originally Posted by November Rain

suicide, for the last three or four posts, i keep saying i'm looking at the concept archtype and you keep bringing back specific storyline specifics.


how can we have any sort of discussion when you keep looking at the finer details of a single fictional story detail and i keep looking at the larger scale trope of the character.

How can we come to any sort of conclusion when your are IGNORING the details and aspects that derail your arguement in order to make it fit into the 'concept archtype' that you want it to fit in?

Basically, in order for me to accept that Superman is more realistic than Batman, I have to forget EVERYTHING I know about them bar the barest gist of a storyline?

That's ridiculous IMO.

Originally Posted by November Rain

your batman argument to putting together high levels of probability in order to come up with the unique traits that produce bruce wayne is very reminscent of the physics experiment which showed technically if you shot a tank bullet into a sheet of paper, there is a possibility it would bounce off. you would therefore recommend building armour out of paper based on this notion as a realistic approach to protecting yourself.

How does that even make sense?

This has nothing to do with recommendation. I wouldn't recommend anyone try and be Batman. I never even said it was definitely feasible. Just MORE likely than becoming Superman.

Originally Posted by November Rain

that superman idealogy would be like wearing some sort of vest which may not be completely bullet proof but could save your life 4/10 and has been shown to save people's lives outside of an laboratory experiment.

I have literally lost the plot with you here... what Superman ideology are you referring too... cause I can't see what your commenting on, let alone whether it makes sense... it might help if you actually quoted what your talking about

Originally Posted by November Rain

if you did a normal distribution of people in society and the events leading to a batman were more scarce than the events leading to a superman, wouldn't that mean batman is less realistic?????

If you did a normal distribution of people in society and the events leading to a batman and a superman... both would come back zero...

Originally Posted by November Rain

batman motif is someone who has been scarred by a traumatic event in his passed loved ones who has isolated himself in order to become the best in his specific field. by using the very tatics that caused the original tragedy itself.

that is completely different to tackling a bully that has bullied your friend. said student would have had to have left the school and this kid would have had to have excelled in every single extra curricular field of study, sports, exams, had the populat girls and completely erradicated bullying at his place, all while having no friends and touring school at night creating pionnering means to stop bullying.

how much harder is that than a new ethnic kid from out of town becoming the most popular and quarterback for the sports team who gets good grades and pulls teh school together??

So i'm not allowed to go into story specifics when i'm point out Superman's unrealistic qualities, but you are with Batman?

I am only doing what you are doing. Boiling down the character to it's barest elements and providing a vague analogy.

And now you are doing what I was doing... pointing out how much more complicated the story is than those elements account for.

Which is precisely why your arguement is contradicting itself!

I have highlighted a few of the 'story details' that you are getting hung up on so you can see your own hypocrasy.

You are commenting on the details of Batman's story being what makes him unrealistic, but claiming Superman realistic without addressing any of the details.

As I said before, Double Standard.

Originally Posted by November Rain

in all sense, there's no way to quantify the media's response to a unique alien outsider joining us, and also there is a cultural aspect to take into consideration, some cultures may embrace him without any hassle while some may be more scared or skeptical of him. so either your or my situations are very feasible and one isn't necessarily more realistic than the other but mine is still very much possible.

we could be talking about the story of tarzan and you could spend the entire time talking about how impossible it is for humans to talk to animals and derail what i'm trying to present.

you're intelligent enough to know what i'm trying to place infront of you, i am not the person who came up with this concept, this is a well established trope which was established thousands of years before you, i, superman or batman ever existed.

and you know fully well you don't need, costumes, an alien origin, or any of that stuff to be considered a superhero, that's just glaze to make characters stand out on print.

No one is argueing that Superman doesn't fit into that 'trope'.

I'm just argueing that it doesn't make him more realistic or believable because he does.

[hopefuldreamer]

Originally Posted by WildcatNC

Punisher.

Originally Posted by November Rain

meh, a persucuted individual who wants to end up changing the world around him and sets up a sanctuary for others to follow in his footsetsp

charles xavier has a lot of people beat on this one.

infact alot of chatacters have batman beat on this one.

i can think of lots fo realistic comic book characters, actual heroes though is a lil bit trickier.

Just on a side note, Punisher and Xavier I will accept as more realistic than Batman when considered within the context of their world's.

[November Rain]

Originally Posted by hopefulsuicide

How can we come to any sort of conclusion when your are IGNORING the details and aspects that derail your arguement in order to make it fit into the 'concept archtype' that you want it to fit in?

Basically, in order for me to accept that Superman is more realistic than Batman, I have to forget EVERYTHING I know about them bar the barest gist of a storyline?

That's ridiculous IMO.



How does that even make sense?

This has nothing to do with recommendation. I wouldn't recommend anyone try and be Batman. I never even said it was definitely feasible. Just MORE likely than becoming Superman.



I have literally lost the plot with you here... what Superman ideology are you referring too... cause I can't see what your commenting on, let alone whether it makes sense... it might help if you actually quoted what your talking about



If you did a normal distribution of people in society and the events leading to a batman and a superman... both would come back zero...




So i'm not allowed to go into story specifics when i'm point out Superman's unrealistic qualities, but you are with Batman?

I am only doing what you are doing. Boiling down the character to it's barest elements and providing a vague analogy.

And now you are doing what I was doing... pointing out how much more complicated the story is than those elements account for.

Which is precisely why your arguement is contradicting itself!

I have highlighted a few of the 'story details' that you are getting hung up on so you can see your own hypocrasy.

You are commenting on the details of Batman's story being what makes him unrealistic, but claiming Superman realistic without addressing any of the details.

As I said before, Double Standard.


No one is argueing that Superman doesn't fit into that 'trope'.

I'm just argueing that it doesn't make him more realistic or believable because he does.

alright, describe the batman trope in your eyes, i've describe a superman trope

in fact screw it, let's say we both describe their tropes and discuss those within the specifics of our descriptions of them so we can move forward otherwise we are not going to get anything done

and the only reason i was trope trolling with your batman motif was because you were doing it with my superman one and i wanted to point out how bloody irritating it is. take some of your own medicine

and apologies for not quoting, i find the whole quoting thing leads to a desconstruction of any real form of an argument because nothing gets achieved. i've been on here far too long to realise that. And while it can be 'fun', i don't want it to disintegrate into repetitive chat, which i think ours is on the verge of doing.

[November Rain]

Originally Posted by hopefulsuicide

Just on a side note, Punisher and Xavier I will accept as more realistic than Batman when considered within the context of their world's.

[hopefuldreamer]

That's a fair reason not to quote I agree, it does happen and probably would if we continued.

I'm not going to go any further with this 'trope' stuff because I honestly don't see how fitting the two Superheroes into simplistic archtypes helps us achieve any sort of conclusion on who is the more realistic.

I guess the only thing I can really conclude from our arguement is that we have each taken our own subjective understanding of the term realistic.

I initially took it completely at face value, and then have attempted to see it from a contextual perspective.

You seem to have started argueing from a contextual perspective and have now moved into a more literary realism, that i'm just not sure has any reflection on the point I was actually making in the first place.

So it's like we're argueing apples and oranges

My points in summation:

1. In a completely literal, scientific sense, Batman is more realistic than Superman.

2. There are many many details of Superman's origin story that, even when taking into account the context of a world where powers and aliens exist, make him still more unrealistic in my eyes (i.e. Kents taking him in, Glasses as disguise etc).

And I think i'll just leave it at that!

Originally Posted by November Rain

Well i'm not THAT bull headed. Especially Punisher, who is argueably more realistic even in a literal sense, than Batman is.

I just hadn't thought of him

[November Rain]

you know if you consider the fact charles was raised as a human and ultimately goes out of his way to protect humans from other mutants, he would be in a similar trope as supes



but i'm just stirrnig the pot, i'll let it be

hopefully we can find something else to debate over somewhere down the line, it's been magical...

[Chris Wallace]

This has gotten a little out of hand. All I was trying to say is that Batman is not as much of a real world concept as many of us would like to believe.

[Chris Wallace]

Originally Posted by GothamAlleys

Youre forgetting a very important fact that fans seem to ( some intentionally) forget about, which is that it was actually a mob hit in disguise, thats why Bruce was spared to testify it was an attempted robbery.

Ah, the retcon; the panic button for when story-telling has taken a bad turn. First off, it took them how many years to decide that this was what happened? I don't even know that this story is canon (I don't think it is because it hasn't truthfully spread throughout the mythos) and even if it is, I would think a professional hitman would be even LESS likely to leave a witness than a desperate junkie. You don't need a living witness to say it was a mugging. You take the wallets and the cops will draw their own conclusions.

[GothamAlleys]

Originally Posted by Chris Wallace

Ah, the retcon; the panic button for when story-telling has taken a bad turn. First off, it took them how many years to decide that this was what happened?

Its not a retcon, its what was established in the first canon and current as well. In Year Two Chill is still a killer for hire. And if you dont accept this as canon than you cant accept the name Joe Chill as canon as well since it came around that time too

And it HAS been spread throughout mythos. It was restated again in the 80s as well. People and WB just like to quietly bury it down cause it doesnt fit with the current Batman movies, as theyre trying to do with many other things. Anyway, I wrote about Chill some time ago - http://gothamalleys.blogspot.com/201...-remember.html

And you cant just take a small fraction of a picture and discard the rest. Its like saying you watched Empire Strikes Back and in the first 2 minutes it didnt say Vader was Luke's father so that doesnt hold value. Thats the exact same thing here, entire continuity should be taken into consideration, not an out of context fragment of it. Or at least one era. Theyre always consistent and have a good continuity

I would think a professional hitman would be even LESS likely to leave a witness than a desperate junkie. You don't need a living witness to say it was a mugging. You take the wallets and the cops will draw their own conclusions.

Its a kid, he wont identify mobsters. All he will say is that they tried to take necklace from Mom and for cops its an apparent robbery. Job done. Without a witness testifying its a robbery police mightve suspected a mob hit and start digging into it

[November Rain]

Originally Posted by Chris Wallace

This has gotten a little out of hand. All I was trying to say is that Batman is not as much of a real world concept as many of us would like to believe.

oh there was no malice with me and hopefulsuicide and it's all been nipped

i totally understand where you are coming from with your view point though as i share it.

[Chris Wallace]

Originally Posted by GothamAlleys

Its not a retcon, its what was established in the first canon and current as well. In Year Two Chill is still a killer for hire. And if you dont accept this as canon than you cant accept the name Joe Chill as canon as well since it came around that time too

And it HAS been spread throughout mythos. It was restated again in the 80s as well. People and WB just like to quietly bury it down cause it doesnt fit with the current Batman movies, as theyre trying to do with many other things. Anyway, I wrote about Chill some time ago - http://gothamalleys.blogspot.com/201...-remember.html

And you cant just take a small fraction of a picture and discard the rest. Its like saying you watched Empire Strikes Back and in the first 2 minutes it didnt say Vader was Luke's father so that doesnt hold value. Thats the exact same thing here, entire continuity should be taken into consideration, not an out of context fragment of it. Or at least one era. Theyre always consistent and have a good continuity



Its a kid, he wont identify mobsters. All he will say is that they tried to take necklace from Mom and for cops its an apparent robbery. Job done. Without a witness testifying its a robbery police mightve suspected a mob hit and start digging into it

Yeah, because dead people with empty pockets just SCREAMS mob hit. And out of curiosity, how do you explain Joe leaving Bruce alive in the movies, where it WAS just a mugging gone wrong?

[DaveMoral]

Much as i love Batman, the Punisher is without a doubt the most realistic superhero/comic hero. He's a special forces guy turned fed, his famiky is whacked by the mob, he basicalky fakes his death and he 's got friends and the know how to get his gear(what he didnt already have stockpiled) via black market... and at every opportunity he kills his targets. Which is why he's got a handful of recurring villains.

That's costumed vigilantes. Actual realistic comic heroes though... Dick Tracy takes the prize.

[SuperFerret]

Too bad, Frank's only barely a "hero".

[GothamAlleys]

Originally Posted by Chris Wallace

Yeah, because dead people with empty pockets just SCREAMS mob hit. And out of curiosity, how do you explain Joe leaving Bruce alive in the movies, where it WAS just a mugging gone wrong?

Well, if you dont find it plausible than I cant really tell you anything more. It is how it is and I find it very plausible and even better to have actually a witness testifying its a robbery. Knowing that Wayne was getting under the skin of many influential people, just dead bodies with empty pockets would smell wrong. Having a kid actually seeing people taking money/jewelry is a different thing. And which movie youre referring to? In Begins it was just a robbery gone bad, but in 'Batman' it was a hit

[Chris Wallace]

Too much focus is being put on the superpowers or lack thereof and we're ignoring the points brought up in my original post.

[Chris Wallace]

Originally Posted by GothamAlleys

Well, if you dont find it plausible than I cant really tell you anything more. It is how it is and I find it very plausible and even better to have actually a witness testifying its a robbery. Knowing that Wayne was getting under the skin of many influential people, just dead bodies with empty pockets would smell wrong. Having a kid actually seeing people taking money/jewelry is a different thing. And which movie youre referring to? In Begins it was just a robbery gone bad, but in 'Batman' it was a hit

Says WHO? What came up in ANY of those movies to suggest the Waynes were targeted-which, btw, is the KEY ingredient in investigating a mob hit. If the cops didn't know they were being targeted, they'd have no reason to suspect it was a hit. If they did know, then they wouldn't have bought the random mugging ruse.

[November Rain]

Originally Posted by Chris Wallace

Too much focus is being put on the superpowers or lack thereof and we're ignoring the points brought up in my original post.

i blame the the thread title, it means people skip the original post.