Tron Bonne
All Ass, No Sass
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 33,289
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 31
That proves nothing, because then 1 would assume Morrison was aware of this or the intention he set for Leo. It's kinda like how he openly admitted he didn't realize the themes of Batman and Robin arcs, or the Batman and Robin #3 arc. These things just happen at times.
Lex won't be Leo in the upcoming movie either and once again Morrison in the interview doesn't directly state that Leo was Lex, yet he was more than open to state Hurt was the devil.
He basically says he likes to write stories and insert things to leave interpretation open, aka, he loves to write ambiguous things in his story that can seen different ways. It doesn't prove anything for sure, or otherwise, disprove anything. However, it does show that he does like to insert things that allow for things to be examine.
And you keep bringing up that interview as some kind of validation of your point, but it's not. There's nothing he said to disprove it, and the part you ignore every time, is an inserting spin to this idea more than anything. I mean, really, if you believe this interpretation is totally closed it's time to nut up or shut up, so to speak, and go to the text. Take all these points and show how they either do not work or don't represent the text at all. I mean you want to see it that way it's fine, but to totally close off this possibility with all the things (from the superficial to the thematic to the parallel) there, then lets see some text examination to put your manhole lid down on it.






