Batman Begins "I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you."

[The Kid]

Would batman's father have let ra's die?

Or even more.... What's the better risk? Giving a terrorist bastard with funny hair and pointy ears a chance to escape and do more evil, or knocking him out and capturing him so he can go to jail where you can be sure he's not going to cause much harm or fear fear fear fear fear fear?

 

[iceberg325]

Would batman's father have let ra's die?

Or even more.... What's the better risk? Giving a terrorist bastard with funny hair and pointy ears a chance to escape and do more evil, or knocking him out and capturing him so he can go to jail where you can be sure he's not going to cause much harm or fear fear fear fear fear fear?

You cant compare Batman and his father. I dont think his pops would have let Ras die, but he didnt go through everything Bruce went through. Another thing we have to take into consideration is the Batman we see in BB is new to this superhero thing. He'll make mistakes and learn from them. Look at what happened when he was in the narrows checking out the teddy bears. He thought he could easily take out the guys. What happened? He was put on fire. I think he learned from that. Same with the Ras situation.

 

[Boss]

Ok, I don't know how this has been discussed or not, but I'll give a shot at it anyway.

Well, since Bats clearly got many of his techniques of surviving from Ra's, I'm sure that he can't feel any sort of "guilt" towards saving Ra's, when Ra's, as Bats, should be able to handle the situation. As a ninja on a train to hell, he should be prepared to get out on his own.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

He'll show up again. Ra's always shows up again....

 

[Ben Urich]

I really hate it when directors find it necessary to kill off villains in movies. Why not save them for sequels?

 

[The Kid]

You cant compare Batman and his father. I dont think his pops would have let Ras die, but he didnt go through everything Bruce went through. Another thing we have to take into consideration is the Batman we see in BB is new to this superhero thing. He'll make mistakes and learn from them. Look at what happened when he was in the narrows checking out the teddy bears. He thought he could easily take out the guys. What happened? He was put on fire. I think he learned from that. Same with the Ras situation.

Oh Snap. I can and ... yeah... have compared them because:

"I'm using this monster to help other people just like my father did."- bruce wayne. Theyre two different men, undeniable, but they share the same ideology.

The whole movie's prettymuch about a child living up to and honoring his father's legacy thanks to a compassionate and idealistic girlfriend, trustworthy and honarable butler, and godly old tech wiz. His father, as a good doctor, was impartial to who he was saving and just saved them no matter what... no question. Rachael even pimp smacks bruce a few times to remind him about his dad's beliefs.

His acts were completely pre-meditated in this situation. He calmly decided to do what he did, not act recklessly. In the narrows situation, maybe he wasn't too careful, maybe. The scarecrow was an unexpected obstacle so it's difficult to say if it was his virginity to superheroing that was his downfall there. He seemed to be doing fine until then. And that bastard, scarecrow farted his gas on him unexpectedly like a wimp. .

what about all that other stuff about ra's possibly escaping and the risk of causing more fear fear fear fear fear? Is it worth it to let someone like him have a chance to do more harm even though he's has a slim chance of escaping? I don't think so...

 

[iceberg325]

Oh Snap. I can and ... yeah... have compared them because:

"I'm using this monster to help other people just like my father did."- bruce wayne. Theyre two different men, undeniable, but they share the same ideology.

The whole movie's prettymuch about a child living up to and honoring his father's legacy thanks to a compassionate and idealistic girlfriend, trustworthy and honarable butler, and godly old tech wiz. His father, as a good doctor, was impartial to who he was saving and just saved them no matter what... no question. Rachael even pimp smacks bruce a few times to remind him about his dad's beliefs.

His acts were completely pre-meditated in this situation. He decided to do what he did, not act recklessly. In the narrows situation, maybe he wasn't too careful, maybe. The scarecrow was an unexpected obstacle so it's difficult to say if it was his virginity to superheroing that was his downfall there. He seemed to be doing fine until then. And that bastard, scarecrow farted his gas on him unexpectedly like a wimp. .

what about all that other stuff about ra's possibly escaping and the risk of causing more fear fear fear fear fear? Is it worth it to let someone like him have a chance to do more harm even though he's has a slim chance of escaping? I don't think so...

He did look up to his pops, They have 2 different situations though. His father didnt go into the underworld, become a criminal to understand there mindset, dress up as batman and fight supervillians. Bruce's situation is much more complex. Plus Im not sure about Bruce grandparents, but id bet they werent murdered in front of his fathers eyes. Bruce wanted to help people just like his dad, and he is doing so. Like I said in one of my earlier posts, Bruce wayne is human. He can go against what he believes and contradict himself just like any other man. Just because he wears a suit doesnt make him immune to it. IMO it makes his character much better. Its much more complex than saving the day putting the villain in jail.

 

[The Kid]

ok, i'll play. lol

Different people. Different methods. Same ideal. 2 Save lives.

Maybe batman made a mistake. That's why this thread exists, I guess. The question is if he did the wrong thing there and I'm in the mindset that he did.

What I find complex is that he's not just another punisher out for vengeance against criminals. he instead, like his father is a true hero in the sense that he's compassionate towards all life without question and is willing to do whatever it takes to save it from destruction. In this case, he failed to honor his father's wishes. Again. The first time was when he planned to kill joe chill. The next was when he blew up ra's house. Afterwards was the police chase with all the death he could have caused. And lastly we get batman deciding a life isn't worth saving because it's beyond saving in his mind, when he's supposedly learned that no life is beyond saving and all deserve justice. "I'm no executioner." You liar. Ra's fate was in your hands and you decided its end right there when you said you didn't have to save him. Nevah! Master Wayne would be very displeased with you, young bruce.

Now it's possible ra's is still out there somewhere, plotting to destroy gotham with an atomic bomb and it's all on batman. The man can't afford to make mistakes like this. Ever. Human or not. He's not an ordinary bruce wayne who falls through wells sometimes anymore. He's batman.The stakes are too high to screw up.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Murdering someone, and being an "Executioner" is not the same thing as NOT saving someone.

He had to blow up Ra's place. I mean, it slowed down they're plans for Gotham enough.

 

[Beelze]

Wesyeed - how do you even know Bruce's father would've saved Ra's?

 

[raybia]

There's been a bit of contention about the validity of that line. Would the Batman of the comics have made the same move? Has he before? Or was he totally out of character when he said that in the film?

Another poster here had this to say in another thread:


As much as I hate to say it, there's definitely validity to that point of view. How is Batman any better than Ra's if he lets him die?
Of course you could mention that Ra's didn't actually die - there's a GIF from the movie floating around the internet that spotlights Ra's falling to safety just before the monorail crash - but the question still lingers.

Your thoughts?

This movie was called "Batman Begins" not "Batman as you know him."

Batman started off as a vigilante and has evolved to what he is now presented as.

I'm sure in retrospect Bruce will look at the some of his actions during the events of Batman Begins as lessons to learn from.

 

[The Kid]

Murdering someone, and being an "Executioner" is not the same thing as NOT saving someone.

He had to blow up Ra's place. I mean, it slowed down they're plans for Gotham enough.

Way I see it is Batman's the reason the train's going to fly off the tracks and go kaboom. He knowingly allows ra's to go down into his exploded tracks or escape it somehow even though he's a dangerous criminal who should instead be put on trial and locked away rather than given a chance to do evil again. It's like in those bond movies where the villian makes a slowly moving death device for the hero and leaves the room assuming the thing will work and the hero will be dead. Is that not an execution of some sort? I'm not sure...

He had to escape to safety. Putting everyone's life in danger, including his own, wasn't really necessary or a good idea to me.

Beezle, I don't know, but based on who his father is, a doctor impartial to his patients, who wants to save lives, do what's right, and is a compassionate and also optimistic individual who believes we only fall to learn to pick ourselves up, I'd guess he might have saved ra's. I ask because maybe some view him a bit differently and think he'd let the man go down too.

 

[El Payaso]

I really hate it when directors find it necessary to kill off villains in movies. Why not save them for sequels?

Dignity.

 

[iceberg325]

Batman's the reason the train's going to fly off the tracks and go kaboom though. He knowingly allows ra's to go down into his exploded tracks or escape it somehow even though he's a dangerous criminal who should instead be put on trial and locked away rather than given a chance to do evil again. It's like in those bond movies where the villian makes a slowly moving death device for the hero and leaves the room assuming the thing will work and the hero will be dead. Is that not an execution of some sort? I'm not sure...

He had to escape to safety. Putting everyone's life in danger, including his own, wasn't really necessary or a good idea to me.

Beezle, I don't know, but based on who his father is, a doctor impartial to his patients, who wants to save lives, do what's right, and is a compassionate and also optimistic individual who believes we only fall to learn to pick ourselves up, I'd guess he might have saved ra's. I ask because maybe some view him a bit differently and think he'd let the man go down too.

I think opinions would change when someone knows who they are saving. If you are aware that you are saving a villian who is on the brink of destroying a city, you're mind would change. I dont care who you are lol. At this point, Ra's could be labeled a terrorist. I think if batman would have saved him, he'd be foolish. A fool stuck in their own way. Its a decision he made that would benefit the city. If he would have let him live, I think in a way its selfish. Save him then what? He would have on his conscience, "Phew, I saved him. Im a good guy" but theres a chance he can still be on the loose. Or the other choice. "I wont kill you, but I dont have to save you" I'm still a good guy because I didnt kill Ras, and the whole city could sleep much better tonight. I think IMO he made a great decision.

 

[The Kid]

I'm trying to say the hero or doctor whoever it is who seeks justice would save lives regardless of who they're saving... it works that way in real life too.. but ...ok, point taken.

What's better?

An unconfirmable death?

Or an incarcerated terrorist?

 

[iceberg325]

I'm trying to say the hero or doctor whoever it is who seeks justice would save lives regardless of who they're saving... it works that way in real life too.. but ...ok, point taken.

What's better?

An unconfirmable death?

Or an incarcerated terrorist?

In the comic world, they both have no relevance. How many times have we seen the bad guy escape? Its almost the same. If they are incarcerated, they are only there for a short time. If they are claimed to be dead, they are away for a short time, and they come right back. Its the same IMO.

 

[raybia]

Way I see it is Batman's the reason the train's going to fly off the tracks and go kaboom. He knowingly allows ra's to go down into his exploded tracks or escape it somehow even though he's a dangerous criminal who should instead be put on trial and locked away rather than given a chance to do evil again. It's like in those bond movies where the villian makes a slowly moving death device for the hero and leaves the room assuming the thing will work and the hero will be dead. Is that not an execution of some sort? I'm not sure...

He had to escape to safety. Putting everyone's life in danger, including his own, wasn't really necessary or a good idea to me.

Beezle, I don't know, but based on who his father is, a doctor impartial to his patients, who wants to save lives, do what's right, and is a compassionate and also optimistic individual who believes we only fall to learn to pick ourselves up, I'd guess he might have saved ra's. I ask because maybe some view him a bit differently and think he'd let the man go down too.

Actually Bruce went out of his way to both save Ra's and reason with him.

When the Monastry was blowing up and burning down he picked up Ra's to carry him out and when the explosion thru Ras down the him, Bruce dove down it to save him.

Even at the end when Ra's was in Bruce's mansion, Bruce asked for more time because he felt Gotham could be saved from the corruption.

What is the implication? If Ra's would have agreed, Bruce would have let Ra's go instead of apprending him for crimes against humanity.

Based on the intended death toll on Gotham and the apparent deaths and collateral damage that did take place as a result of Ra's actions, I find it perfectly acceptable that a "Green" Batman leaves him there to save himself from the runaway train.

 

[Spawn187]

Wesyeed - how do you even know Bruce's father would've saved Ra's?

How do you know that Bruce's Father is in deed Bruce's father??????If you ask me i think Fox is Bruce's Father cus that dud is smarter than a mofo.

 

[iceberg325]

How do you know that Bruce's Father is in deed Bruce's father??????If you ask me i think Fox is Bruce's Father cus that dud is smarter than a mofo.

lol

 

[Everyman]

I really hate it when directors find it necessary to kill off villains in movies. Why not save them for sequels?

But having a villain apparently killed survive and come back is an old trick. And I think this is what happened to Ra's.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Way I see it is Batman's the reason the train's going to fly off the tracks and go kaboom. He knowingly allows ra's to go down into his exploded tracks or escape it somehow even though he's a dangerous criminal who should instead be put on trial and locked away rather than given a chance to do evil again. It's like in those bond movies where the villian makes a slowly moving death device for the hero and leaves the room assuming the thing will work and the hero will be dead. Is that not an execution of some sort? I'm not sure...

But, the way I see it.....Ra's sealed his own fate. He's the one that destroyed the controls.....he's the one that was going to destroy Gotham. I don't think Ra's has ever stood trial for his crimes...int the comics, atleast....I don't know if the world actually belives he exists in BB.....and, there was no evidence to link him to the crimes, and he probably has enough paid off judges to get him off (no...not like that....).

Although....this kinda seems like it'd be nice fodder for a Talia-Bruce realationship in a later film.

He had to escape to safety. Putting everyone's life in danger, including his own, wasn't really necessary or a good idea to me.

That's the thing......he was in a corner. He had about an army and a half behind him, he had his mentor Ducard (who's line seemed to imply, "Don't do this...and we'll just kill you..) and the leader "Ra's" (the fake).

I think, Bruce had to stop them at all costs, short of killing them. I think he was just trying to get out alive, although it was a short chance of it, at worst he could stop them from destroying Gotham....even if he died.

Although.....it was a terrorist headquarter.....I don't think most people could feel sorry for any who didn't make it out.

Beezle, I don't know, but based on who his father is, a doctor impartial to his patients, who wants to save lives, do what's right, and is a compassionate and also optimistic individual who believes we only fall to learn to pick ourselves up, I'd guess he might have saved ra's. I ask because maybe some view him a bit differently and think he'd let the man go down too.

I dunno, your right....there's been so many interpretations of the man. Some say he was once portrayed as an verabally abusive, harsh father......and other have portrayed him as a very pacifistic, compassionate, gentle man.

From Batman Begins, I dunno....I don't think we got enough of the pacifist to assume what he would have done.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

How do you know that Bruce's Father is in deed Bruce's father??????If you ask me i think Fox is Bruce's Father cus that dud is smarter than a mofo.

Well, Bruce isn't Black....so............

[SIZE=+0]But having a villain apparently killed survive and come back is an old trick. And I think this is what happened to Ra's.[/SIZE]

Oldest trick in the book, indeed. I see him returning eventually.

 

[The Kid]

In the comic world, they both have no relevance. How many times have we seen the bad guy escape? Its almost the same. If they are incarcerated, they are only there for a short time. If they are claimed to be dead, they are away for a short time, and they come right back. Its the same IMO.

No way, it's not. We can't assume that. If he's incarcerated, he's locked away assuredly not to cause harm for a long time, maybe forever if he gets life. If he escapes, so be it. Batman will try and get him again. But to let him have a chance to run free after all he's done? That's hardly the same as locking him away in jail.

 

[The Kid]

Actually Bruce went out of his way to both save Ra's and reason with him.

When the Monastry was blowing up and burning down he picked up Ra's to carry him out and when the explosion thru Ras down the him, Bruce dove down it to save him.

Even at the end when Ra's was in Bruce's mansion, Bruce asked for more time because he felt Gotham could be saved from the corruption.

What is the implication? If Ra's would have agreed, Bruce would have let Ra's go instead of apprending him for crimes against humanity.

Based on the intended death toll on Gotham and the apparent deaths and collateral damage that did take place as a result of Ra's actions, I find it perfectly acceptable that a "Green" Batman leaves him there to save himself from the runaway train.

And it goes against everything he says he believed about seeking justice, being like his father, and saving lives, even of those people like that criminal in the monastary. And it also isn't too smart to allow such a dangerous person a chance to be free. why'd he let Darkman have that chance?

 

[The Kid]

But, the way I see it.....Ra's sealed his own fate. He's the one that destroyed the controls.....he's the one that was going to destroy Gotham. I don't think Ra's has ever stood trial for his crimes...int the comics, atleast....I don't know if the world actually belives he exists in BB.....and, there was no evidence to link him to the crimes, and he probably has enough paid off judges to get him off (no...not like that....).

Although....this kinda seems like it'd be nice fodder for a Talia-Bruce realationship in a later film.

Batman planned the train crash. Batman's not supposed to decide who deserves saving and who doesn't. Batman believes in justice.


That's the thing......he was in a corner. He had about an army and a half behind him, he had his mentor Ducard (who's line seemed to imply, "Don't do this...and we'll just kill you..) and the leader "Ra's" (the fake).

I think, Bruce had to stop them at all costs, short of killing them. I think he was just trying to get out alive, although it was a short chance of it, at worst he could stop them from destroying Gotham....even if he died.

Although.....it was a terrorist headquarter.....I don't think most people could feel sorry for any who didn't make it out.

Batman believes in justice... "I'm no executioner."

I dunno, your right....there's been so many interpretations of the man. Some say he was once portrayed as an verabally abusive, harsh father......and other have portrayed him as a very pacifistic, compassionate, gentle man.

From Batman Begins, I dunno....I don't think we got enough of the pacifist to assume what he would have done.

I can only say he was a good man, a doctor(seemingly) who probably didn't choose who was worth saving and who wasn't as most I know of don't, did what he could with his money to help a suffering gotham, would have been ashamed of his son for wanting to kill joe chill, didn't try to fight a dirty guy pointing a gun at him, and sacraficed himself for his wife and child. imo

blablabablatexttomakepostlongenough