BvS All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - Part 96

[Destructus86]

haha these guys are hilarious. Fun to watch

 

[BatFan1979]

I wonder if Snyder will respond with a video

Maybe Batman whipping back his cape to show Han's gun hanging from his utility belt .... or maybe R2 popping up behind the cockpit on the Batmobile...that would be classic too!

 

[HaplessHenchman]

Yeah it is nice to see the creators having fun with their product and each other. A nice change of pace from the endless fighting amongst the fans

Agreed.

 

[Marvin]

@IamtheKnight.
You can do as you please, whatever you find more enjoyable and not simply for appeasement or annoyance these others. There are various easy avenues folks can take if they want to ignore something. I'll be sure to respond where you address me.
Secondly, this is the first I’ve heard of this urban legend debate(haven’t really been around). Never knew it was a thing(ala destruction/neck snap etc). Here I thought I was trailblazing. Now I’m motivated to seek out what other people have thought about this.

Thirdly, I think I'll try my hand at this multiple quoting fashion you seem to enjoy, seems like a lot less work on my part, it's more direct and with less to think about and remember. Sorry in advance for all the con's that come with it, then again, not really. But first lets' see to some of the personal stuff:

Aww, look at you, all mad because I use smileys. So cute! You will get more, don't worry.

I'm mad? And because you use smileys? huh? If you mean that because I inserted my textual smiley's, rest assured I only did that(that one time) because we have image limits and I tend to lose track on long posts, and doing that I don’t have to worry. I can see why you keep trying to paint me in certain ways(see below) during the course of this, that kinda seems to be your way(and we all have our process if you will), but that you insist on me being glum and or mad I find mostly ironic for I can't see myself ever getting mad on an internet forum however. I do get sassy in retort here and there though. Not sure I have enough energy for anything more. Do your thing and smile and assume away.

Just like you would debate a movie with someone who has seen when you yourself have not seen such movie, as I saw you doing in the TMNT....

And here I thought I only defended movies to the death like MOS caused I loved them. Not sure how much I could love a film I didn’t see. Then again, there is something to be said for an intelligent discussion based on evidence in and off itself and without bias of a film experience that might earn or lose your favour due to execution(and humor/cool action/Wesley Snipes). I didn't actually defend said movie or it's quality, I contested (poor)points, often made by habitual detractors, many of them harboring an 'admitted' agenda. See, it's not too hard for me to debate the logic/merit of something into itself; such as a villainous ploy, learning karate from a book, how urban legends can work..etc. Especially when the argument derives in the idea that the material is as nonsensical as it’s always been(hint). Almost ironic how we are right now debating the merit of such a thing without having seen the movie, however is that possible? One of those many SHH mysterious I suppose. But all that non relevance aside, on to the relevant.
In a spoiler tag so as to not get in the way of the more pertinent goings on:

Spoiler

I'm sorry. And? It was used in TDKR. And? That's hardly a story I would go for reference. In the grand scheme of things, Batman is not about the CIA. You can keep on writing this long rants on how the CIA here and how the CIA was used there...It doesn't matter.... Read what I actually write.

Yes and read what I write when I explain: whether you want to involve national security in batman stories or not, if it doesn't make sense, it doesn't make sense. A story about superman doesn't need to involve the president but that doesn't mean such a thing doesn't need to make sense outright, could give a damn if he never meets the president, it should still make sense. That's great that you don't think batman stories need involve national security, but that doesn't change our basic ability to diagnose how much sense it would make. As for TDKR, I hear it's one of the best movies about batman ever. Though picking and choosing what is allowed in the mythos does seem to be a running theme here.

How? And please be thorough

You explain how he currently does all of those important things in detail as opposed to just listing them, and I'll be sure to explain how little they will or have to change if at all. Dr. Leslie Thompkins in particular. The particular and crucial way he associates with this confident somehow being destroyed now that's he's not public...

For the urban legend (funny you stopped using that terminology when I posted what an urban legend actually is, and how it doesn't apply to Batman) to work, he would need to like never leave the comfort of his vehicle, not have a Bat-signal of top of police H.Q, not interact with anyone really, not have a sideckick must likely, only save the world "every other weekend" or something", to avoid sightings, etc. I have already said this. Pay attention bro.

Not so funny really, I barely remember what your definition of the term was tbh. I saw arguing the matter as an obvious tangent(and we have more than enough going), and instead of getting into it, I sought to pull the focus back to the matter at hand, I also figured I'd just stop listing it cause I knew where it lead but it seemingly still lead right back here. The patting on the back nature of your post has pulled me in, congrats. Here's the official Websters: an often lurid story or anecdote that is based on hearsay and widely circulated as true <the urban legend of alligators living in the sewers> &#8212;called also urban myth . Seems relevant imo. That being said, I'd rather not get into the semantics or into the game of who can find the definition that best serves their point. I don't care what you want to call it, that batman is seen as an urban legend like equivalent is my stance. For arguments sake, I'll continue to call it 'urban legend' as per this concise Merriam citing. And yes, I also read why you then asserted that batman is then disqualified from being as such. The problem here is the very person you are giving these reasons to is currently in a debate with you as to the nature of reasons. Seeing men dressed up as alligators every night in the sewers won't stop that urban myth from being an urban myth sorry. Oh that's right, this is the part where you might suggest that unlike seeing men dressed up as the alligators, these sightings are of the supposed "REAL MAN DRESSED AS THE BATMAN"...Along with that, neither will signs reading there are are alligators posted on every man hole(bat symbol allusion), still an urban legend, only more organized...
/tangent.

You see, this is why I multi-quote. Because that way you get exactly what the poster said, and not something else. I actually said that Blake was a poor version of Robin. That does not mean "that's how you do it!" Well maybe it does, in youse head

Yes, I can see why you do this now thanks. And no, I also never said that's how you do it, for I also alluded as to it's quality(if you yourself read). More importantly I noted that you yourself saw it valid enough a 'robin' to make your point with. Surely your points aren't so dubiously convenient as they can't stand on their own when faced with a new context. You suggested that even nolan needed robin in his definitive saga, no doubt because you weren't about to let me get away with suggesting the character isn't needed. I simply pointed out how such a note worthy(worthy of note) approach to Robin could be used if need be, going forward. Has nothing to do with what goes on in my head and everything to with standing beside what you put out there actually.

How and why would it be a sham or a hoax if a newspaper starts publishing pictures of the Batman? And please no conspiracy theories.

Oh really? And I guess that before 2004, cameras didn't exist! What sorcery did they use to come up with all those images from last century? And of course no one ever carried cameras with them, and certainly no such thing as photojournalists trying to get picture of the Batman

Never said they didn't exist before and that it required sorcery to get photos(don&#8217;t remember even implying that). I clearly said &#8216;not as they do now&#8217;, where people seemingly capture just about anything in their path and never miss a moment. Same way people can make a phone call at just about any moment they deem vs the way it was in the 90's(phone booths). Any sort of story breaks out in today&#8217;s world and it&#8217;s all over social media with various captures within the hour. If this is a batman working in the late 80&#8217;s into the early 2007(ish), then it&#8217;s very much a different 20year paradigm and one worth noting when engaged in a conversation about a story/image not getting out and onto everyone&#8217;s FB newsfeed to be the number one trending topic world wide.
As for these prowling photojournalists...I personally don't think there are that many clear photos of batman out there tbh. Then again, I watch a similar premise in Arrow and the issue of photos never comes up, imagine that. I doubt it ever will. The the national security agency seemly have their fair share though(go figure).

You saw alot of newspaper pictures in TDKT did you? Cause I don't really remember even one during the course of that multi decade story and he was pretty public in that, I&#8217;m not sure it happens is all. As for your question, the answer is simply, don't believe everything you read in the papers, who does anyways. They lie about terrorists, health research, corporate spending, now they are writing about superheroes running around in costume at night? I read once that there are alligators in the sewers(pictures and all), sensationalist media is surprisingly predictable.

Can you translate this? In english, please. I can see why you like this Snyder, you both have some serious communication issues. At least now you're using paragraphs and not "text walls".

Sure thing. You wanted a simple explanation as to how it's possible that the batman can be sighted and photographed all over the city literally every night yet not be considered 'real'? I posted a picture of a man in a bat suit and hockey pads being sighted and photographed in a part of a city. Even simpler: Maybe the reason people keep seeing this guy running around town is less complicated and more obvious than you have the capacity or want to believe. People dressing in the image of this popular urban(whatever) rumor and proceeding forth.

Mojo Jojo like reiteration:
You asked as to how eye witness accounts of various Santa's in malls are at all comparable to sightings of batman. I again not only pointed to the various &#8216;faux batmen&#8217; that are inspired to run around the streets. But I also decided dwell on the idea that faux anything(santa in this case) allow for a myth to live on and grow exponentially by way of awareness maybe even 20 years worth, but they also lend credence to the basic reality that the real Santa doesn't exist but rather he has various fakes. This cuts right into your argument in various ways. That as the general public, not so much the criminals, get wind of more and more dentists and such turning up in walmart costumes and black curtains, the idea that The Batman isn&#8217;t real starts to fester among those that have never infact been 'punched by him'. This is also where I point to 'big foot' and the mechanism of finding out about the people in hairy suits and boots and how that generates more and more skepticism as to the real thing maybe not existing in spite of the 'sighting phenomena'.

As for my communication, I have my moments I suppose. English isn't actually my first language(hardly an excuse) but we make do, I also tend not to really care on forums tbh. You do happen to have all my focus this time around. As for the walls, I find it reduces things vertically not to break things up. But that's just preference. As for the obligatory snyder reference, I happen to like and respect Snyder for a whole litany of reasons actually but you're not one miss out on an opportunity to assume and use that to support a point.

my god this multi-quote yields a long post, may as well start ignoring some of these.

Again we go back to...Why. Why can't Batman just exist and people know about it. A Bat-signal by itself doesn't mean anything to criminals if they don't believe he exists in the first place.

You can't be serious(unless I'm missing something). Are you asking me why batman can't just exist and people know? I never said that approach couldn't happen or wouldn&#8217;t be valid, that's not what this discussion is about so why you are asking me that baffles tbh. I&#8217;m actually proposing the skeptical analysis as to why he may not actually have ever existed in the context of the urban myth premise, nothing more.
And where did I say criminals don't believe he doesn't exists; outside your assertion that they couldn&#8217;t? You do realize how possible it is that a good amount of the criminals that are currently afraid of batman have never actually encountered him right? They've just(get this) heard the stories and the warnings from all over. Such a thing doesn&#8217;t have to be grounded in fact or experience, just broken telephone rumor fueled by fear. Not too uncommon among the superstitious and cowardly. See that's kinda how fear myths work: Stay out of the sewers or encounter 20 foot long reptiles, yet it may have never actually happened&#8230;"Criminals, stay out of Gotham streets or Gotham all together or else you&#8217;ll encounter the batman or worse this batman ghost demon man bat creature that seemingly protects the city(unconfirmed).."you see where I'm going. You&#8217;d have to be trying not to.

The really tragic part of this past bit here is you somehow misunderstanding that I never actually said the criminals doubt his existence. I'm perfectly fine with killer crock and penguin and thug2 all knowing him on an intimate basis, yet the general pubic thinking he a silent ghost. This again plays into blade 3.

Batman needs to be real to people before you can talk about the Bat-signal being a deterrent by itself. The idea that he may be "out there" only really works if he is, you know, out there, and people are interacting with him. Do I have to keep on repeating myself here?

Read above

If this Batman is never seen, then he has no power as a symbol, because people won't believe in it.

This is typical you. If only you actually went about proving this as opposed to simply repeating it over and over perhaps it would stop getting thrown in your face. You assert: "Because people won't believe in it". Ok, why not? Sorry but that's like if people are never seen to have walked into a dark strange alley and things turn sour, then no one will have enough evidence to believe in such a warning. Are you certain? I mean you are literally just assuming as to what people will do based on little more than your inclination and I&#8217;m supposed to concede an argument on your good word? What's more you seem so certain, are you certain enough to entirely debunk the basic plausibility present here? That same level of plausibility that so much of this (sort of) material is predicated on? Without of course side stepping the issue entirely ala central intelligence..cover ears and stomp feet. I doubt it. What's more, when did I ever say batman is never seen? This is you not even trying again. You're basically assuming word of all of batman's work being done as it pertains to the fight against crime simply won't happen unless he exits. This friend, is the fundamental misunderstanding here.
Here's an assumption of my own, if tmr(or back in 1988year one imo(or 1888)) your media and police chief's issued statements about a jack the ripper terrorizing the city under the full and half moon every month(bat symbol allusion), will "people" far and wide "need to see" this in order to believe and in turn be terrified of it. I don't care how many times you repeat yourself tbh, I&#8217;m more interested in your actual rhetoric.

Ah so if Superman is in the picture then it's a real picture, but if the picture only shows Batman then it's dubious. Sounds legit.

Superman(and the rest particularly Aquaman) taking an official photo with a faux batman doesn't seem likely. Read it twice.

And you're crying about Santa Claus and Tupac to try to defend this sillyness It's not how I define the mythos, it's how it has been presented for the most part brah. If you're on board with whatever they throw at you that's cool, as long as it looks cool, just like MOS. Right?

To answer your last question, if that's what it was, Nope. I'm also hardly &#8216;crying&#8217; about anything, least of all, rumors that my iteration of the mythos possibly being changed on me whilst calling any such major deviation to it silly and other names.(funny cause I'm associating both crying and name calling with fanboy behavior anchored in a purism beef).

And seeing as you never miss an opportunity to make this about me..That's great that the mythos has been presented a certain way for the most part as you say. Like the various changes to things presented in MOS, I can understand how you(admittedly) have your mind made up before the fact in the face of change. No big deal, at least this time I'll be able to see you coming, "brah"(/smiley).

Note: using brah at the end of a point feels kinda *****ey personally. I know that now having done it, but it&#8217;s has a poetic fit in this particular context, hard to explain.

As I said at the top, do whatever you want.

 

[TheNextNolan22]

Maybe Batman whipping back his cape to show Han's gun hanging from his utility belt .... or maybe R2 popping up behind the cockpit on the Batmobile...that would be classic too!

That...sounds awesome.

 

[TheBat812]

I love Fincher's work, but tbh I do think he's a bit of a pretentious d**k, and sometimes doesn't seem like the nicest person.

You ever read "Rebels on the Backlot"? Ya, he's kind of a dick. Makes great films though!

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

Ok not trying to start a Marvel/DC war but a friend of mine sent me this.

Spoiler

All I have to say is...

 

[zryson]

Anybody knows if the 2018 JL movie is true or the article supposed to be this year? Because that dont make any sense, if the WB president tell us the BVS have a final to put it directly im JL movie, doesnt make sense they do another solo movies avter BVS before JL and two years after is a long time , and in another interview they tell the movie is sooner than you think,

Considering how slow WB is proceeding with their new superhero movie universe, 2018 could be accurate.

 

[paulogonza]

Considering how slow WB is proceeding with their new superhero movie universe, 2018 could be accurate.

you are propably right, but it is a stupid thing, because 2018 probably will have Avengers 3 with Thanos and infinit gems, but we have to wait the confirmations of this with is against everything the WB execs said months ago.

 

[zryson]

you are propably right, but it is a stupid thing, because 2018 probably will have Avengers 3 with Thanos and infinit gems, but we have to wait the confirmations of this with is against everything the WB execs said months ago.

Even without Avengers 3 in the coming years many huge movies are going to open, so JL will have to contend with those releases (such as future Star Wars movies, and other franchises.)

 

[paulogonza]

Even without Avengers 3 in the coming years many huge movies are going to open, so JL will have to contend with those releases (such as future Star Wars movies, and other franchises.)

and not only this , the possible fatigue genre can cause a disappoint boxoffice with so many superhero movies in the next 5 years, i really hope they do it in 2017 but i doubt.

 

[DarkSentinel]

[YT]3C7lUfVIOa4[/YT]

Quoted for the new page.

This is gold.

 

[Lobo]

I love the flirtation between Abrams and Snyder

 

[SpideyFan866]

Ok not trying to start a Marvel/DC war but a friend of mine sent me this.

Spoiler

All I have to say is...

This is why The Avengers are better. The JLA is too overpowered.

 

[Marvin]

Considering how slow WB is proceeding with their new superhero movie universe, 2018 could be accurate.

Slow and steady.

 

[SpideyFan866]

Considering the announced release dates, JLA is likely coming out in late 2017:

• 08/05/16 - Shazam or Aquaman
  
• 06/23/17 - Aquaman or Shazam
  
• 11/17/17 - Justice League

That's my prediction.

 

[paulogonza]

and worse, Marvel launch movies like Dr. Strange, Ant-man , Guardians of Galaxy with propably quality and success, and WB have the most know heros and is so difficult to do a movie without batman or Superman, i love this heroes but is time to others have the big screen glorious, batman and superman had many movies and only now we will have a movie with this two, and only in 2018 a JL movie, in that tima Marvel will be introduce in your cinematic universe almost all your B and C heroes adn 3 avengers movies, is a shame WB

 

[SpideyFan866]

and worse, Marvel launch movies like Dr. Strange, Ant-man , Guardians of Galaxy with propably quality and success, and WB have the most know heros and is so difficult to do a movie without batman or Superman, i love this heroes but is time to others have the big screen glorious, batman and superman had many movies and only now we will have a movie with this two, and only in 2018 a JL movie, in that tima Marvel will be introduce in your cinematic universe almost all your B and C heroes adn 3 avengers movies, is a shame WB

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

Slow and steady.

That's why turtles beat rabbits in races.

 

[Pickleweasel]

and worse, Marvel launch movies like Dr. Strange, Ant-man , Guardians of Galaxy with propably quality and success, and WB have the most know heros and is so difficult to do a movie without batman or Superman, i love this heroes but is time to others have the big screen glorious, batman and superman had many movies and only now we will have a movie with this two, and only in 2018 a JL movie, in that tima Marvel will be introduce in your cinematic universe almost all your B and C heroes adn 3 avengers movies, is a shame WB

Ya they should come out with JL in 2017 and then never come out with a JL 2 because by that time there will be 20 more Marvel movies. That makes sense. 2017 or nothing. Never make a movie after 2017 because by that time to many other movies will have been made.

 

[KillerMcQueen]

That's why turtles beat rabbits in races.

I saw a few people try that tactic when I ran Cross Country in high school, didn't go so well... either that or they were just slow.

 

[Migu-EL]

So wait???? I can't get it straight anymore, is WB trying to rush their DCCU by "oversaturating" BvS with JL members, or are they moving too slow now??? Which one is it??? lol

 

[KillerMcQueen]

So wait???? I can't get it straight anymore, is WB trying to rush their DCCU by "oversaturating" BvS with JL members, or are they moving too slow now??? Which one is it??? lol

Both.

 

[TheNextNolan22]

and worse, Marvel launch movies like Dr. Strange, Ant-man , Guardians of Galaxy with propably quality and success, and WB have the most know heros and is so difficult to do a movie without batman or Superman, i love this heroes but is time to others have the big screen glorious, batman and superman had many movies and only now we will have a movie with this two, and only in 2018 a JL movie, in that tima Marvel will be introduce in your cinematic universe almost all your B and C heroes adn 3 avengers movies, is a shame WB

I'm not even gonna put this in Google Translate to try to interpret it.

 

[shauner111]

Come on guys, be respectful, he's from Brazil. Im sure you can understand what he's getting at.

But no, i don't agree with it. This is no race. WB should do what they're doing, take their time. Quality over quantity. For me personally, i can care less about seeing a Flash movie, another Green Lantern movie (even if done right), Teen Titans, Aquaman, even another Superman movie. I just don't care. So i get it when WB just wants to use Batman, or a Justice League that involves the other heroes, but puts Batman/Superman at the center.

Im curious about Justice League but not excited. I want to see if they'll do something different than Avengers, copy Avengers or just do a slightly more serious version of it. But that idea doesn't make me jump from my seat. I dont need to see it. I would be content just getting Batman movies after this B v S film.

I'd be into a Wonder Woman movie if it wasn't for my doubts on Gal Gadot, who i don't believe has it in her to lead an entire solo franchise and be dynamic enough to pull that off, making me believe in the character. I think she's sweet, she's eye candy, and she's fine enough to be in a crowded team-up movie. But nothing more. So now i unfortunately don't even care about solo Wondy.

Im usually a Marvel hater, but the last two movies they've released....well...i enjoyed the hell out of em'. Much to my own surprise. I enjoyed Sin City 2 more than some. Yet, im still getting a bit burnt on the comic book movie stuff. Sin City is original visually, and Guardians was pretty fresh for the genre. Obscure too. But i dont see where they can take a JL without repeating things we've seen so many times with sci-fi team-ups. It just feels like a money grabber and nothing else. Im getting bored with alien invasions, where American characters have to save the planet, yet they mainly just show the United States lol.