BTAS Batman or Nolanverse Batman?

[ganon51]

His cape can.

Nope. For one thing, the glider is designed to carry one person and the weight of an extra person would have an effect on its effectiveness. Secondly, a glider is not a parachute. When Batman opens his cape air moves across the wing and generates lift. When a skydiver opens their parachute it creates drag that slows their fall. Fourthly, when the cape opens the wings are pulled upward by the wind. Think back to when you were a kid. You grab the big umbrella and jump off something high. For a second you hang in the air, then the umbrella inverts and you plummet because it is no longer generating drag. Thats whats happening here.

I´ve never said the movies were realistic. I´ve said the contrary, actually.

And it´s called science fiction. A man riding a rocket christmas tree and not dying is called absurdity. There´s a difference.

You're trolling right?

 

[Mutante]

Nope. For one thing, the glider is designed to carry one person and the weight of an extra person would have an effect on its effectiveness.

You´re just making things up. The movie never states how much weight it can handle.

Secondly, a glider is not a parachute. When Batman opens his cape air moves across the wing and generates lift.

Who are you to say that? People have survived falling from HUGE buildings, without capes or parachutes, and all due to the effect of the wind that slows them down, and you´re telling me that the same can´t happen in a fantasy movie where a man wears a cape with that purpose in mind? The cape can clearly damp a fall. It´s showed also in Batman Begins. It´s a piece of tech that´s supposed to react that way.

 

[ganon51]

You´re just making things up. The movie never states how much weight it can handle.

Unrealistic to the core, period.

Who are you to say that? People have survived falling from HUGE buildings, without capes or parachutes, and all due to the effect of the wind that slows them down, and you´re telling me that the same can´t happen in a fantasy movie where a man wears a cape with that purpose in mind? The cape can clearly damp a fall. It´s showed also in Batman Begins. It´s a piece of tech that´s supposed to react that way.

Tell that to the people who fell from the World Trade Center in 9/11, or this guy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NI3HctaXdZA

you´re telling me that the same can´t happen in a fantasy movie where a man wears a cape with that purpose in mind?

Exactly, it's pure fantasy. So why can't you except that in a CARTOON(even more fantasy) that the Joker can fly a christmas tree-rocket?? In a universe of aliens, shapeshifting demons, a Bat-costume wearing rich bloke with every gadget in the world in a small belt and a guy who's immortal via magic pits and THAT puzzles you?

 

[Mutante]

Unrealistic to the core, period.

Of course it´s unrealistic. But it´s faithful to that universe´s pre-established rules. And those rules tell us that Bruce as access to technology that doesn´t exist in our world.

Tell that to the people who fell from the World Trade Center in 9/11.

You´re purposely misinterpretating what i said.

Exactly, it's pure fantasy. So why can't you except that in CARTOON(even more fantasy) that the Joker can fly a christmas tree-rocket?? In a universe of aliens, shapeshifting demons and a guy who's immortal via magic pits and THAT puzzles you?

Because it goes against the rules of that world. In that world humans are still mortal. They don´t have super powers. That´s why Batman saves them. Why should Joker be able to do something like that? That´s fantasy, but it´s a bad form of fantasy. A contraditory one. You can make fantasy without being illogical.

 

[regwec]

You never told us why you considered a rocket to be less plausible than Clayface. Our did I miss that?

 

[Mutante]

You never told us why you considered a rocket to be less plausible than Clayface. Our did I miss that?

In that universe clayface is more plausible than the scene with the rocket, because clayface doesn´t violate any pre-established rules. At any point in the show we´re led to believe that a human can´t suffer a mutation and gain supernatural abilities. That´s actually a big part of the show. But we´re led to believe that a human is still a human and can be easily hurt.

Anyway, i couldn´t care less about Clayface. He is just one more reason why the show fails to be better than the Nolanuniverse for me.

 

[DACrowe]

Are you suggesting that, if something is surreal, it cannot be well written?

I would call that specific example more cartoonish than surreal. It works in BTAS because it is a cartoon, so cartoonish events can happen and still serve a story that aims to be more ambitious or substantive than other cartoons. On film, it could work in a surrealist way. But if approached in the tone of TAS, it would be conceived as cartoonish in live-action, and in that sense our mutant friend is right, it would be perceived as a negative in a Batman movie (rightfully so).

What I would say this long conversation boils down to is one poster prefers cinema as a medium to children's animation, while many posters have no issue of valuing a cartoon show meant for a younger audience (and up) as a serious, substantive creation. If you find the medium as lesser than film, then yes, I can see why Nolan making a cinematically brilliant adaptation of the character will be preferable for that opinion.

 

[milost]

Anyway, i couldn´t care less about Clayface. He is just one more reason why the show fails to be better than the Nolanuniverse for me.

Why?

Clayface/Matt Hagen is more compelling than any of the villains in any of the films in my opinion. Feat of Clay? Mudslide? Sad, sad stuff. Everything from the title card to the actual story is fantastic, not to mention his monstrous and sympathetic music theme.

 

[regwec]

I would call that specific example more cartoonish than surreal. It works in BTAS because it is a cartoon, so cartoonish events can happen and still serve a story that aims to be more ambitious or substantive than other cartoons. On film, it could work in a surrealist way. But if approached in the tone of TAS, it would be conceived as cartoonish in live-action, and in that sense our mutant friend is right, it would be perceived as a negative in a Batman movie (rightfully so).

Cartoons frequently are surreal, and surrealism is often cartoonish. You seem to be substituting terms merely because you feel that one is slightly more pejorative.

What I would say this long conversation boils down to is one poster prefers cinema as a medium to children's animation, while many posters have no issue of valuing a cartoon show meant for a younger audience (and up) as a serious, substantive creation. If you find the medium as lesser than film, then yes, I can see why Nolan making a cinematically brilliant adaptation of the character will be preferable for that opinion.

If that's the case, then all the disingenuous pronouncements about "bad writing" should be discarded in favour of a simple statement that the poster prefers watching movies and doesn't value animation.

I expect that statement hasn't yet appeared because it is rather stupid.

 

[ganon51]

That´s fantasy, but it´s a bad form of fantasy. A contraditory one. You can make fantasy without being illogical.

In that universe clayface is more plausible than the scene with the rocket, because clayface doesn´t violate any pre-established rules. At any point in the show we´re led to believe that a human can´t suffer a mutation and gain supernatural abilities. That´s actually a big part of the show. But we´re led to believe that a human is still a human and can be easily hurt.

Then explain the load of crap humans like Batman withstand and survive all the time? like being shot and stabbed and hit by super-humans. Not only does all that stuff not kill him, but it usually doesn't even put him in a hospital bed.

Anyway, i couldn´t care less about Clayface. He is just one more reason why the show fails to be better than the Nolanuniverse for me.

That and your love and adoration for the Nolan movies in general. I have nothing against the Nolan films and I like them(except the third one) but to true comicbook Batman fans like myself, it was definitely not better than BTAS. It wasn't as Batman-y as TAS and the DCAU Batman as a whole. You expect me to believe that the Nolanverse with it's throat infection-voiced Batman, Sean Connery-Bane, nerfed version of Scarecrow and sorry excuse for Talia are better than BTAS? no way

 

[DACrowe]

Cartoons frequently are surreal, and surrealism is often cartoonish. You seem to be substituting terms merely because you feel that one is slightly more pejorative.

And you tend to be conflating the abstract with application. In general (yes a generalization), the term "cartoon," applies a certain type of simplified (or clean) logic found in American animation shorts that while arguably surreal, features a clarity and approachability that even a child can understand with perfect ease. To conflate it with the surrealism of a Dali painting or, let's just say, a Bergman film is not apt. Because if a live-action film presented the image in question (the Joker riding a rocket powered Christmas tree out of Arkham) in the same tonal and narrative context that TAS did, it would indeed be met with a negative reaction by critics, general audiences, and even fans. Why because that flavor of "surrealism" is too close to naturalism and logic for it to work in live-action, at least for those who want to treat the material "seriously (another big word to throw around). It would either have to find another tact to envisioning the character's escape and aptitude for danger (as Nolan did in TDK) or go further into the world of the "surreal" (which you seem to be suggesting). See the Tim Burton Batman movies as examples of the latter.

Now, if you're saying that we could have a truly "surrealist" Batman film? That would be interesting, but WB would never green light such a venture. However, TAS may be "surreal" in the literal definition of the word, but if that sequence was transferred to live-action in the exact same manner, it would not be consumed or understood the same way due to medium differences. And if someone does not like the differences in one medium, say an American afternoon cartoon show, then yes, their argument is understandable, though I personally do not agree with it.

If that's the case, then all the disingenuous pronouncements about "bad writing" should be discarded in favour of a simple statement that the poster prefers watching movies and doesn't value animation.

That feels like the elephant in the room this conversation is circling.

 

[Mutante]

Then explain the load of crap humans like Batman withstand and survive all the time? like being shot and stabbed and hit by super-humans. Not only does all that stuff not kill him, but it usually doesn't even put him in a hospital bed.

Then why does he need to save people from train crashes, explosions and rocks falling on top of them? If humans can survive a rocket without a scratch, i don´t think they need Batman at all.

To me, Batman being almost immune to physical damage is another example of lazy writing. But that´s a problem we see in almost every medium outside movies. But, hey, at least Batman is a physically gifted man who wears a suit that offers him a good deal of protection, hence him being able to endure more than a regular person. For The Joker i can´t find any sort of excuse. But i´m not really sure if in the show Batman has done anything as suicidal as riding a rocket.

You simply pointed out another problem with the cartoon. Another reason why it´s not as flawless as many like to believe.

 

[ganon51]

Then why does he need to save people from train crashes, explosions and rocks falling on top of them? If humans can survive a rocket without a scratch, i don´t think they need Batman at all.

To me, Batman being almost immune to physical damage is another example of lazy writing. But that´s a problem we see in almost every medium outside movies. But, hey, at least Batman is a physically gifted man who wears a suit that offers him a good deal of protection, hence him being able to endure more than a regular person. For The Joker i can´t find any sort of excuse. But i´m not really sure if in the show Batman has done anything as suicidal as riding a rocket.

You simply pointed out another problem with the cartoon. Another reason why it´s not as flawless as many like to believe.

Joker survives near-death experiences all the time!! Like in the ending to "Mad Love" and the ending of "World's Finest".

not really sure if in the show Batman has done anything as suicidal as riding a rocket.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDMvMo6H3zk

 

[The Joker]

Joker survives near-death experiences all the time!! Like in the ending to "Mad Love" and the ending of "World's Finest".

Or the ending to 'The Laughing Fish'.

 

[The Batman]

I wish Mutante would just stop typing.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

For me BTAS is slightly above Nolans Batman, but they're not to far off from being rated very closely.

 

[ganon51]

For me BTAS is slightly above Nolans Batman, but they're not to far off from being rated very closely.

that avatar!

 

[Mutante]

Joker survives near-death experiences all the time!! Like in the ending to "Mad Love" and the ending of "World's Finest".

That´s my point.

I don´t have that many problems with the show. The only reason i´m having this conversation is because many people talk about it like if it was perfect, when it isn´t. In a forum where people ***** about plot holes and goofy scenes all the time, i´d imagine that a show with so much non sense and incoherences wouldn´t be considered so above everything else.

If you wanna compare BTAS with the Nolanverse we have to be equally critical of both, and since so many people have so many complains about the Nolanverse, i guess it´s ok to have a few of my own about BTAS.

Unless we establish that BTAS, because it´s a cartoon, is allowed to do anything without receiving criticism. If that´s the case, then this isn´t a fair comparison and this poll shouldn´t exist.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Yes, the Christmas tree rocket... good writing, bad writing. Thing is that it was the kind of thing you'd find in the 1966 series (or the 60's cartoons). It was a little odd, but not too off for a cartoon.

 

[Mutante]

kind of thing you'd find in the 1966 series (or the 60's cartoons). It was a little odd, but not too off for a cartoon.

BTAS isn´t that different from the 1966 show and other cartoons that didn´t receive the same kind of acclamation. It just has a darker tone and a better score.

Even if you watch The Batman and Beware The Batman, wich most people don´t really care too much about, they´re not that far away from BTAS. Last night i watched an episode of each three and the biggest difference is still the fact that BTAS has a darker tone. In terms of storytelling and characters, they´re close. BTAS can be a little bit more dramatic from time to time, but that´s about it.

 

[ganon51]

In a forum where people ***** about plot holes and goofy scenes all the time, i´d imagine that a show with so much non sense and incoherences wouldn´t be considered so above everything else

But they're not goofs/plotholes, Joker's supposed to have that cheating-death gimic all throughout the DCAU (Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker for example). The guy cheats death more times than Ra's

BTAS isn´t that different from the 1966 show and other cartoons that didn´t receive the same kind of acclamation. It just has a darker tone and a better score.

Even if you watch The Batman and Beware The Batman, wich most people don´t really care too much about, they´re not that far away from BTAS. Last night i watched an episode of each three and the biggest difference is still the fact that BTAS has a darker tone. In terms of storytelling and characters, they´re close. BTAS can be a little bit more dramatic from time to time, but that´s about it.

So then we know that they (BTAS and Nolanverse) take influence from already established interpretations of the character. What you can't handle (Joker riding a rocket tree) is not a stretch of what the character has already done in the past. Is it more ridiculous than him not dying from whiplash when Batman caught him with his grapple line in TDK?

 

[Kane52630]

I wish Mutante would just stop typing.

The world would be so much better off.

 

[Mutante]

But they're not goofs/plotholes, Joker's supposed to have that cheating-death gimic all throughout the DCAU (Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker for example). The guy cheats death more times than Ra's

Just because it happens many times doesn´t make it less stupid. We´re comparing a cartoon to a movie, right? So the cartoon should be subjected to the same kind of criticism, otherwise, what´s the point?

People complain about the excess of conveniences, leaps of logic and poorly explained events in movies. Well, BTAS has all that in triple. If such a thing is considered a bad thing in film, it should also be considered a bad thing in a cartoon like this too. We are, after all, comparing the two, right?

Is it more ridiculous than him not dying from whiplash when Batman caught him with his grapple line in TDK?

Yes, much more ridiculous. And it´s even more ridiculous if you consider the fact that he escaped without a scratch. And if you think the two come even close to be comparable, you´re so blindly biased that i don´t think we should continue this discussion.

Joker not dying in TDK is simply a convenience that doesn´t violate any unchallengeable
rule. Of course, a person could die from a situation like that. But can we be 100% sure of that? No, we can´t. It´s one of those things that can either go wrong or bad.

But how does a man grabs himself to a rocket christmas tree and confortably flyes to wherever he wants, breaking through the roof, without falling, being seriously injured or dying right away? I don´t think that´s physically or humanly possible.

I honestly would like to see something like this happening in a Batman movie, just to see how many people would consider it great.

 

[milost]

If the Nicholson Joker or Ledger Joker jumped on a rocket Christmas tree and rocketed through the ceiling in a huge getaway, I'd stand up and applause.

Not to mention there would be many great gifs to come out of it.

 

[Kane52630]

I would replay that part over and over because of how amazing it would be.