Right first of all ill start with Kev. Your sig quote doesn't work because I didn't actually call him a moron, I was implying he would look idiotic/a moron if he continued to name call.
Okay down to business.
Explain how he was "boring" ?
He had no real unique personality. He had no memorable scenes, his obsession with fear (which is, at least to me his best attribute) was pretty much ignored.
"over the top" and "campy" in his performance. See: Joker, Penguin, Two-Face, Riddler, Poision Ivy, Mr. Freeze from previous movies.
Meh... at least they were entertaining and had a personality (Freeze's and Ivy's were bad personality's but never less at least they had some life to them.
This comment alone isn't what makes you a Burton groupie. It's your posting history and habits. Your past posts don't get deleted, you're a Nolan hater. BTW, this isn't a put down per se ... let alone me slinging mud at you. It's just the truth. You say you're able to call out flaws in Nolan's universe, but you absolutely refrain from doing the same with Burton's riddled version of the mythos.
Have you read my sig? You say CFE stalks you, yet your the one going threw my post history.
Let me break it down for you, son ..
Dont call me son.
and a creepy opposition to Batman.
I don't see how he is a parallel to Batman at all? He is just on the other side of the fence in that he is bad and Batman is good. I can understand how you could say that about Ra's, but not Crane.
Cillian's look alone might be creepier than his mask.
Point being? People want to see the mask, its iconic. You dont think Jack could of been creepy without the white skin? If he didn't have it, you would freak.
Does a villain have to have a back story and be completely over the top to be good?
Not A villain, but this villain would of benefited from a back story and why would he have to be over the top? When did i say or even imply that, your arguing points I didn't even make.
argument against Scarecrow or any other villain in BEGINS exposes the haters for the pieces of crap they are
Ugh... Why do I bother arguing when your going to say things like this?
So when you pop off at the mouth like an absolute idiot saying "Scarecrow shouldn't even be mentioned" makes you look utterly stupid.
When did i say that? I didn't. Again your arguing points I didn't even make. Well played.
Once again, does there have to be. It's up to interpretation. Not to mention, it leaves mystery to the character. As he can still be fleshed out in further installments. You know, because the villain wasn't killed in his movie.
Well if he is perfect as he is, like you say. Then what reason would there be to bring him back to flesh him out?
Yes, it does. He's actually threatning.
Not really. He is threatening in that he can make someone go insane, but thats on a minor scale, and considering Batman now has a mass-produced cure to it, he isn't at all since he is a wimp physically. He thought Ra's plan was to hold the city to Ransom not a kill them all.
You like B89 correct? I see no mention of the flaws of that movie. But oh yeah, you're unbiased. I got on your case b/c your statement alone about Scarecrow makes you stick out like a sore thumb. And by sore thumb, I mean un-adulterated Burton groupie.
Again, look at my sig. Also this isn't about B89 so why bring it up, again, arguing points I haven't made.
No.
One would have to have the attention span of a 4th grader to find this film boring.
Pathetic statement. Everyone finds things boring that others don't. Deal with it.
And Lucius knowing is never directly stated. It's the un-spoken bond between the two, which is another way to link Bruce back to his father. Awesome on MANY levels.
What the hell are you talking about?
Not all of Gotham ... just that little street corner that the whole movie takes place on.
Actually he poisoned the supplys of Gotham, remember the advert? You must "have the attention span of a 4th grader".
I mean the genious BLOWS UP a CHEMICAL FACTORY.
Yeah blowing up a factory making poison is stupid right? Ends justify the means.
t: 
