Discussion in 'Batman World' started by ganon51, Mar 1, 2014.
If executed properly, that moment would be hilarious in live action.
If they can make Joker dressed in drag as a female nurse work in TDK, they could make a rocket Christmas tree escape work.
I chortled at the aweful lawfuls.
Those cardboard cut outs of Batman, Robin, Dent, Gordon, Bullock, Mayor Hill and the rest of the GCPD is fantastic. Also "Laughy the elf", his little sock puppet.
"Grrr where's that Batfella and that Robinfella, ooooh they're gonna spoil my Christmas. What's the matta, can't they figure anything out? Time's up, I'm rubbin' everybody out at midnight."
Yes, because those two have the same exact implications.
If Joker can rig a hospital, he can make a rocket Christmas tree.
No more than the Tumbler driving on rooftops, or the Bat-Pod coming out of it.
Well, the roof scene is plausible, depending on the particular characteristics of that enviroment. The Bat-Pod coming out of the tumbler simply represents an advanced state of technology. Seems impossible to you, but a lot of what we have today seemed impossible 50 years ago, so i don´t really get your point.
What´s plausible about The Joker scene? The man uses a rocket as a vehicle. If you can´t see how dumb and absurd that is, no matter how you twist it, there´s not much i can tell ya.
So is a rocket inside a Christmas tree.
You just admitted it represents an advanced state of tech we don't have, and you don't get my point.
Rethink that one.
We have actual rocket based vehicle technology in the real world, too. The fact that a miniaturized one is placed inside a giant Christmas tree seems too incredible for you is what is really unbelievable.
You defend a Batcycle coming out of a tank, but you can't imagine a rocket inside a Christmas tree. Hilarious.
As goofy as it sounds, the problem is not the rocket being inside the tree.
I think you´re the one who doesn´t get the point.
Reading the past 5 pages, I'm convinced Mutante is a formerly banned member trying to rile up the Batboards; it's just too much going in circles, from the defenses, the logic, the dislikes; it all just fits a stereotype of a Nolanite.
Most Nolanites were a bit more cogent, back in their heyday.
Nolan made me a fan but Animated Series was on the whole better, setting up how American Cartoons should be like from then on and is a true masterpiece. Nolan's Batman movies are good and have set a standard for other blockbusters to follow, but they're not as perfect as some fans would lead you to believe.
You know, this is a discussion board and i´m presenting valid arguments. I know that, to many people, it would be much nicer to be able to say whatever they want without someone challenging their word. But the same way some members can come in here to say how much better BTAS is than Nolanverse, i can do the opposite. Or in this forum you´re only allowed to defend comics, cartoons and anything unrelated to Chris Nolan? If i defend Chris Nolan the same way others defend BTAS, i´m a Nolanite? I fail to see the logic behind your train of thought.
Plus, i´m not offending anyone.
It's an animated tv show that celebrates various genres and the best from episodic animation, mixes Looney Toones and Noir in a way, if that makes sence, so it doesn't go against any rules, from episode 1 we are shown that this is a serious world where the bizarre can happen, and those events are told in a very human way.
I think the western audience is just way too serious with "realism", in Japan for example, One Piece is a true best-seller and it just focuses on telling good and fun stories, that end up being deeper and more complex than it seemed ar first sight. Batman: The Animated Series is a masterpiece in its oun right, i think you're just trying to put the usual standards into something that shouldn't be evaluated that way.
No, you're not. You keep bringing up something being stupid, also calling anything silly, unbelievable, unrealistic, rule breaking of the given rules for the world stupid, yet turning a blind eye whenever someone brings up the Nolan trilogy doing the same thing. Add on to the fact that you keep minimizing posts to answer the first question in said post, deleting the poster's name from the quote for some reason, and then continuing to go back in circles to the next poster making a comment.
You're not discussing anything, and I never said you were offending anyone, you're just very suspiciously acting troll-like and baiting for a debate.
I hate Nolanites
You´re wrong. I´m justifying every single of my arguments. You don´t like them, but i also don´t see you presenting any valid counterargument. You´re the one not discussing anything. You´re the one coming to this thread just to make a personal attack. I´m discussing a subject but you´re just labeling me for having a different opinion than you.
Agreed. Context is key. But it would have to be adapted differently for film.
Not at all. One of your first responses to an unbelievable scene in the movie where Batman falls with Rachel onto a car is his cape made them not die, someone rightfully said that wasn't true and then you tried to go into a rant saying we don't have the information on the cape to know it can't work that way.
And all of this started with a rocket Christmas tree, which is still a lot more realistic and believeable than a poor Bruce Wayne miraculously healing his back getting back to Gotham, setting up fire Bat-signals; And it's even more realistic than Joker's over-lapping Jigsaw like plans from a bomb inside a henchmen to explosives on ferries.
There are portions that are good in the Nolan movies, but stop trying to act like anyone proving you wrong means they're just disagreeing with you on your opinion.
But seriously I'm also getting really tired of my argument with Mutante as well
I see what you're saying but this is the key..
You say it's not humanly possible. You're right. But it's a cartoon, so everything is not humanly possible. It has nothing to do with humans. They are cartoon characters. So nothing needs to be realistic. Not a single thing. You can still hate it, and i would agree with you that it would be silly as hell in a live-action movie. But that moment (depending on how it's executed) would either make me laugh or facepalm. But it's not a live-action movie so you can enjoy things that are silly, fantastical, fun, whatever it may be.
Despite its adult themes once in a while, it's still a kid's show. Anybody who says otherwise is in denial. It's a cartoon made in the early 90s targeting children, and every once in a while they throw in something for the hardcore bat-fans or even the teenage/adult audience. They throw them a bone.
Not everything is good from BTAS. A lot of the people in this thread who are telling you to be quiet are hypocrites because they have no problem dissing the hell out of the Nolanverse but when you tell them that you love BTAS yet you find certain things horrible, guess what? They cant take the heat.
If that moment happened in live-action, half of the people would say it's cheesy and terrible. The other half would find it hilarious and awesome.
But i might have to disagree with your point overall because i see it as a cartoon from my childhood. It's animation and it's not some R-Rated version where they have no limitations, so Joker can escape in a much better way. They went for the fun route instead with that scene, which lines up well with the tone.
I don't think he's making that on purpose, it seems more like he doesn't know of the quote button on the right of each post
How am I a hypocrite??
And in what way am i wrong? Do you have the necessary information to assess how that piece of equipment can or cannot work? Aren´t we led to believe in Batman Begins that the cape has also that function? Isn´t the cape part of a fictional world where more advanced technology exists? Doesn´t Batman do the same thing in basically every medium? So, i don´t see the problem.
Care to explain how a man using a Rocket that size as a vehicle to go to wherever he wants without any sort of setback is more realistic than healing an injury in X-months?
i´m doing that? I´m simply responding objectively to this subject. You´re the one who started with the personal remarks. You´re the one who entered the thread to attack me instead of discussing the subject.