The Dark Knight Rises Nolan...add Robin!!!!!!

[Alex Logan]

Yes, you're right. I see how speaking clearly, and intellectually about personally being offended at how insulting people are being towards the comics would get me, and what I'm talking about very little respect around these parts. Let's ignore all the other posters that are blatantly insulting each other over their opinions, name calling, and hating on Robin for no other reason other than "he's lame!". (Which is who I was originally talking to. Not you)
If you really liked Robin... you would think you wouldn't be okay with posts like that. And if you're just ignoring them because it's pointless to get into it with them, and not worth your time...? Then why ride me?

This would honestly be why my post count is so low... most of the time it's useless to bother saying anything here, as it doesn't seem matter how nicely, diplomatically, or sugar coated I try and explain the way I feel about things. I could be rolling over and pretending I thought Nolan was fabulous, and somehow I'd still come under fire for SOMETHING. It's astounding how many of the original posters aren't here anymore...and this is why.

If you indeed know so much about the comics, Alex Logan, as you claim you do, current and old... then you may have picked up on the fact that I prefer comic book films to be more traditional than Nolan has made his "version". So you wouldn't, and shouldn't have to ask me why he offends me, and why I don't like him.

TDK didn't change many (if any) opinions on comic movies that Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, or the first Spider-Man wouldn't or hadn't already. None of the people I've spoken to see comic book movies in a different light now that they've seen TDK. Do they love it? Yes. Do they think it's one of the best, if not the best of the year? Yes. But it's didn't change the face of the earth, nor did it change movie making FOREVER.

Sad fact of the matter is that a lot of people saw this movie because of Heath Ledger. Argue all you want, but fact is fact. Did he do a great job? Yes. But that doesn't change the large numbers of people that saw this movie that didn't even SEE Batman Begins. They wanted to see Ledger's final performance. And as beautiful as it was, it changed NOTHING for the comic movies of the future. Don't believe me? Ask around. Look it up. Ledger was the obvious draw for this film.

Anyone that claims that TDK made all of it's money strictly on how "ground breaking" of a comic film it was? Is much more of a fanboy than I... but of a different sense. A Nolanite to the core.
Everything that was good about that movie was the work of the actors. Not the director, who failed even Bale by allowing him to deliver one of the weakest performances of his career.

As for Batman and Robin, throwing Schumacher into the discussion won't change Nolan's failure to respect the comic fans, nor would it change his inability to handle the duo correctly WHEN it will need to be. You referencing this makes no sense to me...

Just as claiming that what I'd said before sets me up for a joke at my expense regarding Batman in the fifties and sixties...
Even IF I were talking about Batman's debut (the first place Batman comes from)...Batman's first issue (which was in the late 30's, not 50's and 60's) had death, destruction, and a more serious Joker than even Ledger himself delivered. Just because the dialogue is poorly written doesn't change the serious tone of the story. So I fail to see your ability to connect the ridiculous era of comics to what I said, no matter how I worded my sentence. But hey, maybe you're right! Maybe Joker murdering people because he has nothing better to do IS campy, and fun! A real PBS quality of a story. Or we can talk about Robin's first appearance, which has him getting people killed...on purpose...also really child friendly! But since I was talking about current continuity when I said that, as I tried to explain before... let's just move on.

As for not forcing something on a director that just made the studio millions of dollars... Venom comes to mind. But I'm sure that's different for some interesting reason. Even though WB is more notorious for forcing things on their films than any other studio out there...

Overall? I'm done talking about this on the boards. If you want to continue this conversation, then PM me. This topic has already gone enough off course.

On Topic: If Nolan was as creative of a genius as people claim he is, he would find a way to make Robin fit into his universe. Dick Grayson is a rich character that would make even dull moments in the cave worth watching.

~HoH~

Wow, I didn't even make a dent did I?

 

[Quinzel]

Wow, I didn't even make a dent did I?

idk did you?

 

[SKSpawn]

I think the best course of action overall would be to set up Dick Grayson in the next film as a presence, either as a performer in the circus or otherwise, that is somehow relavent to the plot but doesn't necessarily have to show his families death or anything like that. Then, if neither Nolan or Bale want to do further Bat-films, they can either continue a new trilogy with a new Batman and introduce Robin, or they could spin off into a lighter Robin-centric film.

Robin is an essential character in the Bat-world, and denying that means denying 60 years of the character's presence, and just makes Robin haters look arroagnt, to be honest.

 

[Alex Logan]

idk did you?

No, unfortunately she's set in her ways.

Oh well, the life goes on.

 

[Melkay]

Good.... lord.... this person right here... the one who wrote this post... makes Guard look like my twin brother. This Harlequin, he or she, it's my antithesis...

If you really liked Robin... you would think you wouldn't be okay with posts like that. And if you're just ignoring them because it's pointless to get into it with them, and not worth your time...? Then why ride me?

Pardon the intrusion but what I gathered from his posts was that he likes the comics very much, but he doesn't like Robin. And he doesn't have to. Many people here may not be as eloquent as you (pfff!!) but they may have valid reasons to dislike the character. Maybe he didn't say anything to them because he agreed with them and had reasons of his own. Aren't you jumping to conclusions here?

This would honestly be why my post count is so low... most of the time it's useless to bother saying anything here, as it doesn't seem matter how nicely, diplomatically, or sugar coated I try and explain the way I feel about things.

Wow, talk about sensitive. And I would nominate you for most diplomatic poster of the year, that's for sure. You seem to get too emotional over nothing, thinking the worst about people who disagree with you and not trying to get to a common ground. Nice and sugar coated are not really adjectives that fit you. And you should take no offense at that.

I could be rolling over and pretending I thought Nolan was fabulous, and somehow I'd still come under fire for SOMETHING. It's astounding how many of the original posters aren't here anymore...and this is why.

Or... maybe they don't have time anymore.
Do you want me to go for a violin?

If you indeed know so much about the comics, Alex Logan, as you claim you do, current and old... then you may have picked up on the fact that I prefer comic book films to be more traditional than Nolan has made his "version". So you wouldn't, and shouldn't have to ask me why he offends me, and why I don't like him.

I have to wonder: why liking one thing should necessarily mean disliking Nolan's adaptations? I like Spider-Man 2 a lot, and I still enjoy Superman: The Movie. And that doesn't mean I reject Nolan's Batman or Singer's X-Men for being different from the standard comics depictions... because even then we would have a myriad of different approaches, with diverse visual and narrative styles. I can appreciate difference and authorship. Can you?

TDK didn't change many (if any) opinions on comic movies that Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, or the first Spider-Man wouldn't or hadn't already. None of the people I've spoken to see comic book movies in a different light now that they've seen TDK. Do they love it? Yes. Do they think it's one of the best, if not the best of the year? Yes. But it's didn't change the face of the earth, nor did it change movie making FOREVER.

Who said Forever? And to what kind of people are you talking to? Are they even aware of how the movie industry works? Are they familiar with Singer's X-Men being highly influential, or the first Spider-Man being initially praised by its (relative) faithfulness, or how B&R sunk the genre until moderate approaches like Blade and the X-Men brought it back to live? Are they aware that TDK is the single most celebrated comic book film in history, and also the second highest-grossing movie of all times? Are they aware that DC Films said that the film's style is supposed to be the foundations for new titles from the company, starting with a darker version of Superman for the new film?

In other words... do these peole you talk to know what the hell are they talking about?

Sad fact of the matter is that a lot of people saw this movie because of Heath Ledger. Argue all you want, but fact is fact.

What is a lot? A lot of people saw it for no other reason of seeing what the fuss was all about? Another lot saw it because they wanted to go to the movies that evening and have some fun. Another big lot were the loyal bat-fans. Others were the Nolan followers. Or the Bale followers. Or the people who see every action flick that comes to the theaters. And so on...

... and that's how it works for every movie out there. What are you trying to say with this?

But that doesn't change the large numbers of people that saw this movie that didn't even SEE Batman Begins.

What about all those who rented it on DVD, liked it a lot, also liked the TDK trailers and tv spots, and then went to the movies?
You seem to take TOO MUCH for granted to be classified as rational, my dear.

They wanted to see Ledger's final performance.

!!! ... god in heaven.

And as beautiful as it was, it changed NOTHING for the comic movies of the future.[/qutoe]

(GASP!)
This is a genuine, non-rethorical question: in what world do you live in?
No, really... is it Saturn, or Jupiter, or a parallel dimension?
Wherever it is, stay where you where you are from. This world would be just too weird for you.

Don't believe me? Ask around. Look it up. Ledger was the obvious draw for this film.

Yes, yes dear, you're right, he was that.....
(damn it, the ambulance from the mental hospital is really running late).

Anyone that claims that TDK made all of it's money strictly on how "ground breaking" of a comic film it was? Is much more of a fanboy than I... but of a different sense. A Nolanite to the core.

I consider myself a hardcore Nolanite (I have to be one in front of people like you), and I'm not saying that. That was only one of the aspects. What's strictly, anyway? I don't think the Watchmen graphic novel it's a best-seller strictly because its ground-breaking features. Not all the people who bought it were really able to not that stuff, and many of them just read it due to a good reputation among readers... nothing about being ground-breaking. But Watchmen was ground-breaking... and so it was The Dark Knight.

Everything that was good about that movie was the work of the actors. Not the director, who failed even Bale by allowing him to deliver one of the weakest performances of his career.

I somewhat agree with the Bale thing, but just the work of the actors? What about the script? The allegory, the message, the ferry scene, the arduous work of adapting and selecting material, the faboluous work of photography, the IMAX, the music, the action sequences... what about all that?
If you think Nolan failed Batman, then you really have no favorite comic-book film director. No one out there has done a flawless work, and I'm pretty sure no one will.

As for Batman and Robin, throwing Schumacher into the discussion won't change Nolan's failure to respect the comic fans, nor would it change his inability to handle the duo correctly WHEN it will need to be. You referencing this makes no sense to me...

Maybe we can throw some Burton in too.
And who says Nolan doesn't have the ability to adapt Robin into the series?
He just happened to indicate his lack of interest. And he should, he's just adapting a work, and what stays in or out it's his complete decision. He has stayed loyal and responsible overall, and right now has the trust of the majority of the Batman fans, rightfully so.

Even IF I were talking about Batman's debut (the first place Batman comes from)...Batman's first issue (which was in the late 30's, not 50's and 60's) had death, destruction, and a more serious Joker than even Ledger himself delivered.

Batman's first issue didn't have the Joker. That's because Batman's first issue was in Detective Comics #27.
The issue where the Joker is introduced doesn't have nearly enough serious death and destruction to be even comparable to The Dark Knight.

Just because the dialogue is poorly written doesn't change the serious tone of the story.

No, it was because the lines were poorly writen AND quite simplistic and campy, not serious. The only seriously dark lines I remember from that story were: "Not far from there it's a man whose face it's a permanent mask. His eyes are full of hatred. (...) He's a man that smiles without joy... with a deadly smile. It's the smile of the Joker."

Want to compare that to any of the movie's Joker "origin" stories?

So I fail to see your ability to connect the ridiculous era of comics to what I said, no matter how I worded my sentence.

Wasn't Robin born into that same era of poor writing and creative decisions? We shouldn't mind here where the characters come from but if (and only if) they are open to good adaptations in the current film franchise. That's all. Not everything that has been in the comics CAN or SHOULD be presented in the movies. Whether you like Robin to be in or not, that's another thing. We have characters fighting for screen-time here, Harley.

But hey, maybe you're right! Maybe Joker murdering people because he has nothing better to do IS campy, and fun! A real PBS quality of a story.

...... ? Fun being fundamental to stories? You've got to be kidding me.

Or we can talk about Robin's first appearance, which has him getting people killed...on purpose...also really child friendly!

You really don't want to go into that.

As for not forcing something on a director that just made the studio millions of dollars... Venom comes to mind. But I'm sure that's different for some interesting reason. Even though WB is more notorious for forcing things on their films than any other studio out there...

What? WB notorious for what!? First, you're talking about parent companies here. Second, DC producers are much less involved in their movies than Marvel, who has a rather tight agenda with their films. Second... when you are a critically acclaimed director responsible for the second highest-grossing film in history, and the highest-grossing WB film ever... WB just lets you be. They might ask for minor things, like a new batsuit or stuff like that... but the required presence of a major character? Nope. And after the SM3 disaster, I really don't see anyone making that kind of pressure again.


Really... where did you come from?

 

[CaptainClown]

Thank goodness for Melkay, I began typing up a post in response to that which was accidentally deleted by me pressing back. You saved me time by typing out a general idea of what I was going to say.

 

[El Payaso]

these arguments are silly. look, get robin in a film, done properly , then form your opinions.don't slag off something you haven't even SEEN yet!

Heh. The actual problem is not seeing the product and judge later, but to judge the character and see if it's possible to do it on the big screen without ruin or at least hurt the excellent workl Nolan has been done with the core concept of Batman.

A matter of writing perhaps. I can't be certain enough to blame the concept of the character for his cinematic failures.

We have to consider how amazing the coincidence is. Robin is there and suddenly the tone is lighter, funnier and less essential to a dark Batman.

I mean in BF the character wasn't done amazingly or something but Grayson/Robin was certainly not the worst part of the movie for me. He was pretty bad in B&R but almost everything was bad in that movie, so...

Thing is that Robin found his place when the tone got lighter. That's where he belongs.

And I must say that in BF, Dick Grayson was done amazingly serious.

In B&R they did an effort to portray the issues the Batman-Robin relationship could have to explore.

Sam Hamm's Batman Returns script also had a pretty sucky Robin with a bad origin, so what can I tell you? I still believe that someone will do him justice, but it's difficult for me to accept that to make a cinematic Robin work, you have to be faithful to the comics.

Well, we can't judge BR's Robin since it was never done. But if they really wanted to have Robin in the movie they could have asked for a re-writing. Just as Nolan, Burton never found a place for him. Batman, a love interest and the villiains were always enough and good enough.

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

Good.... lord.... this person right here... the one who wrote this post... makes Guard look like my twin brother. This Harlequin, he or she, it's my antithesis...

Pardon the intrusion but what I gathered from his posts was that he likes the comics very much, but he doesn't like Robin. And he doesn't have to. Many people here may not be as eloquent as you (pfff!!) but they may have valid reasons to dislike the character. Maybe he didn't say anything to them because he agreed with them and had reasons of his own. Aren't you jumping to conclusions here?

Wow, talk about sensitive. And I would nominate you for most diplomatic poster of the year, that's for sure. You seem to get too emotional over nothing, thinking the worst about people who disagree with you and not trying to get to a common ground. Nice and sugar coated are not really adjectives that fit you. And you should take no offense at that.

Or... maybe they don't have time anymore.
Do you want me to go for a violin?

I have to wonder: why liking one thing should necessarily mean disliking Nolan's adaptations? I like Spider-Man 2 a lot, and I still enjoy Superman: The Movie. And that doesn't mean I reject Nolan's Batman or Singer's X-Men for being different from the standard comics depictions... because even then we would have a myriad of different approaches, with diverse visual and narrative styles. I can appreciate difference and authorship. Can you?

Who said Forever? And to what kind of people are you talking to? Are they even aware of how the movie industry works? Are they familiar with Singer's X-Men being highly influential, or the first Spider-Man being initially praised by its (relative) faithfulness, or how B&R sunk the genre until moderate approaches like Blade and the X-Men brought it back to live? Are they aware that TDK is the single most celebrated comic book film in history, and also the second highest-grossing movie of all times? Are they aware that DC Films said that the film's style is supposed to be the foundations for new titles from the company, starting with a darker version of Superman for the new film?

In other words... do these peole you talk to know what the hell are they talking about?

What is a lot? A lot of people saw it for no other reason of seeing what the fuss was all about? Another lot saw it because they wanted to go to the movies that evening and have some fun. Another big lot were the loyal bat-fans. Others were the Nolan followers. Or the Bale followers. Or the people who see every action flick that comes to the theaters. And so on...

... and that's how it works for every movie out there. What are you trying to say with this?

What about all those who rented it on DVD, liked it a lot, also liked the TDK trailers and tv spots, and then went to the movies?
You seem to take TOO MUCH for granted to be classified as rational, my dear.

!!! ... god in heaven.

(GASP!)
This is a genuine, non-rethorical question: in what world do you live in?
No, really... is it Saturn, or Jupiter, or a parallel dimension?
Wherever it is, stay where you where you are from. This world would be just too weird for you.

Yes, yes dear, you're right, he was that.....
(damn it, the ambulance from the mental hospital is really running late).

I consider myself a hardcore Nolanite (I have to be one in front of people like you), and I'm not saying that. That was only one of the aspects. What's strictly, anyway? I don't think the Watchmen graphic novel it's a best-seller strictly because its ground-breaking features. Not all the people who bought it were really able to not that stuff, and many of them just read it due to a good reputation among readers... nothing about being ground-breaking. But Watchmen was ground-breaking... and so it was The Dark Knight.

I somewhat agree with the Bale thing, but just the work of the actors? What about the script? The allegory, the message, the ferry scene, the arduous work of adapting and selecting material, the faboluous work of photography, the IMAX, the music, the action sequences... what about all that?
If you think Nolan failed Batman, then you really have no favorite comic-book film director. No one out there has done a flawless work, and I'm pretty sure no one will.


Maybe we can throw some Burton in too.
And who says Nolan doesn't have the ability to adapt Robin into the series?
He just happened to indicate his lack of interest. And he should, he's just adapting a work, and what stays in or out it's his complete decision. He has stayed loyal and responsible overall, and right now has the trust of the majority of the Batman fans, rightfully so.

Batman's first issue didn't have the Joker. That's because Batman's first issue was in Detective Comics #27.
The issue where the Joker is introduced doesn't have nearly enough serious death and destruction to be even comparable to The Dark Knight.

No, it was because the lines were poorly writen AND quite simplistic and campy, not serious. The only seriously dark lines I remember from that story were: "Not far from there it's a man whose face it's a permanent mask. His eyes are full of hatred. (...) He's a man that smiles without joy... with a deadly smile. It's the smile of the Joker."

Want to compare that to any of the movie's Joker "origin"stories?

Wasn't Robin born into that same era of poor writing and creative decisions? We shouldn't mind here where the characters come from but if (and only if) they are open to good adaptations in the current film franchise. That's all. Not everything that has been in the comics CAN or SHOULD be presented in the movies. Whether you like Robin to be in or not, that's another thing. We have characters fighting for screen-time here, Harley.

...... ? Fun being fundamental to stories? You've got to be kidding me.

You really don't want to go into that.

What? WB notorious for what!? First, you're talking about parent companies here. Second, DC producers are much less involved in their movies than Marvel, who has a rather tight agenda with their films. Second... when you are a critically acclaimed director responsible for the second highest-grossing film in history, and the highest-grossing WB film ever... WB just lets you be. They might ask for minor things, like a new batsuit or stuff like that... but the required presence of a major character? Nope. And after the SM3 disaster, I really don't see anyone making that kind of pressure again.

Really... where did you come from?

A) Wasn't talking to you in my post.

B) Why don't you try READING all of what someone says before responding.

I've already said I'm not talking about this in this thread anymore, but since you made comments in your post that kind of prove that you have difficulty wrapping your head around what other people are saying, I'll post it again.

This thread wasn't started for this pointless mudslinging, and regardless of how much you seem to enjoy it...I'm not going to even dignify your post with a public response.

~HoH~

 

[Ace of Knaves]

hahaha HarlequinOfhate, you are crazy! You don't like what Nolan has done? You're mad. Thats all I can bring my self to say, having a proper debate with you will lead no where.

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

hahaha HarlequinOfhate, you are crazy! You don't like what Nolan has done? You're mad. Thats all I can bring my self to say, having a proper debate with you will lead no where.

I'm mad for having a different opinion? Okay. I'm mad!


~HoH~

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I'm mad for having a different opinion? Okay. I'm mad!


~HoH~

OH theres no problem with you having a opinion, it's just that I think you are the only person i've ever come across who doesn't like Nolans interpretation on the Batman universe. I mean, what's your problem with it?

 

[Alex Logan]

A) Wasn't talking to you in my post.

B) Why don't you try READING all of what someone says before responding.

I've already said I'm not talking about this in this thread anymore, but since you made comments in your post that kind of prove that you have difficulty wrapping your head around what other people are saying, I'll post it again.

This thread wasn't started for this pointless mudslinging, and regardless of how much you seem to enjoy it...I'm not going to even dignify your post with a public response.

~HoH~

You truly baffle me. Perhaps you should have picked a different screen name, something like HATE IN A PUZZLE BOX.

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

lol, I'll send it to you in PM. But no yelling, I promise!


~HoH~

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

You truly baffle me. Perhaps you should have picked a different screen name, something like HATE IN A PUZZLE BOX.

It is you who baffles me. You can not come in, tease someone when they're defending something they care so much about...and not expect them to respond in a negative way. To quote what I said to him is the same...when I am called out, and insulted, I'm going to have a response...and it probably won't be sunshine and kisses.

Ace of Knaves asked me about what I said, and I didn't scream at him. See... I don't want to get mad. I enjoy a good conversation... just don't pick at me, and think I will find it amusing.


~HoH~

 

[Alex Logan]

lol, I'll send it to you in PM. But no yelling, I promise!


~HoH~

Me too, me too! I want a PM!!!

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

lol, The same one? Or a brand new one?


~HoH~

 

[CaptainClown]

OH theres no problem with you having a opinion, it's just that I think you are the only person i've ever come across who doesn't like Nolans interpretation on the Batman universe. I mean, what's your problem with it?

Really??? Really? How long have you been here Ace? Have you not seen the people who don't like Nolan's Interpretation? Do you not remember googleme and his affiliates? Donk is still here and he didn't care for this interpretation...come on ace...

 

[El Payaso]

Just because you personally don't like the character of Robin doesn't mean you can tell other people he doesn't belong in Batman's world.

You're right. There's a whole argumentation behind it, not just bare hatred.

Tell it like it is. You don't like him. That's fair.

That's merely what you like it to be. You're ignoring the argumantations and calling it "hatred." I have justified and fully explained my points beyond any "hatred."

Robin is a part of Batman's history. And as such, should be honoured.

Acknowledged, totally. But to honour it shouldn't necessarily mean, to take it to the big screen.

That said, Bat-myth and some other weak elements have been also part of the Batman history; it doesn't mean they're good ideas to be honoured.

This legacy came before Nolan even knew more than "Batman wears a costume, and fights crime!"... and deserves more respect than it's given.

For some of us, the fact that Robin was created before Nolan was born doesn't mean a lot in its favour. Why should it?

I personally like Batman better ALONE (both in comics and the movies), and yet I know, and accept that Robin is essential to some part of Batman.

To some part, maybe. In the comics, yes. But take Robin out of the movies and the Batman mythos works as good as it gets.

It's time for people to start remembering where these characters come from. And it's ISN'T Christopher Nolan.

The characters come from the comics.

Now it's time to remember what are the context in which those characetrs are in and being discussed. And it ISN'T the comics. It's movies.

 

[Alex Logan]

It is you who baffles me. You can not come in, tease someone when they're defending something they care so much about...and not expect them to respond in a negative way. To quote what I said to him is the same...when I am called out, and insulted, I'm going to have a response...and it probably won't be sunshine and kisses.

Ace of Knaves asked me about what I said, and I didn't scream at him. See... I don't want to get mad. I enjoy a good conversation... just don't pick at me, and think I will find it amusing.


~HoH~

Aha! I knew you where a girl! t:

Calm down sugar dupplin, I was just messing with you. I was mostly serious though and I understand why you care so much about this stuff, so I apologize.

 

[Alex Logan]

lol, The same one? Or a brand new one?


~HoH~

Either one, I just want a PM. t:

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

I wasn't referencing your posts, El Payaso. I never said anything against what you had stated, nor was I ever thinking of you in any of my comments.

Unless you were one of the people that were saying Robin should die, he sucks, he's lame, he should never have existed... etc etc... which I know you weren't...I was talking about several others that had posted before or after you. And when I was talking about Robin "hatred", I meant that.

You explaining your reasons for disliking him outside of "HE BLOWS!" is awesome. And I respect that, and you for doing it.

Now, when I say I feel people should respect the comics, I mean...I think that the comics should have more of an impact on these movies than they do. So while some people might be talking strictly about the movies, I'm going to continue to talk about how I feel the comics are essential to the movies existing in the first place. Thus, Robin could, and should become a very important part of the live action legacy.


~HoH~

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

ADDITION: Because, let's face it... BF, and B&R were just face palmingly bad examples.


~HoH~

 

[CaptainClown]

wait we should include Robin because of BF and B and Robin?

 

[HarlequinOfHate]

lol, What? NO. Do nothing because of those movies except cry... I meant Robin needs to be done right at SOME point. Or some of us will die inside.


~HoH~

 

[Melkay]

A) Wasn't talking to you in my post.

So what?

B) Why don't you try READING all of what someone says before responding.

I did. You're just jumping to conclusions and assuming I didn't, something that seems to be your forte.

I've already said I'm not talking about this in this thread anymore, but since you made comments in your post that kind of prove that you have difficulty wrapping your head around what other people are saying, I'll post it again.

I didn't care if you wanted to stop yourself from more unargumented ranting, sometimes it's better to argue amd not 'leave you be'. Are you usually so sensitive when someone counters what you say?

This thread wasn't started for this pointless mudslinging, and regardless of how much you seem to enjoy it...I'm not going to even dignify your post with a public response.

This thread isn't not aobut mudslinging, but that's what you did with this post. This thread is not only to discuss Robin but Nolan's directorial preferences, as well as his hits and misses. You seem to have a problem with people writing what you say, and that's why you sent me a three part private reponse of blithering rants which could have been seen by everyone else as well. But don't worry, I'll oblige and reply to them... privately.

I'm mad for having a different opinion? Okay. I'm mad!

You're not mad for having a different opinion, just because that particular opinion of yours is mad. (and the arguments to come up to "support" it)