The Official Batman Forever Thread - Part 2

[GothamAlleys]

Then read that comic instead of accusing me of lying or making statements about something I dont know. Im not tRUERtOtHEcORE. I read and make statements when Im fully sure what Im talking about, not hearsays or guesses. Its amazing how some are trying to weasel out of the facts even after so many blatant examples are shown

 

[ALP]

Batman has been a murderer in the past. I recall seeing a comic panel from the 30s where he hung a man from the batwing. What is going on in this thread, some kind of George Lucas revisionism? lol

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Well, in Man of Steel should Superman be unable to fly, have no vision powers etc and should kill too. He's done all those things in the past.

In Silver Age continuity (1954-1986) he killed about 5 people, in DCU continuity (1986-2011), Batman has only killed about 10 people max and in DCnU he hasn't at all. It was only ever a brief period from 1939 to to 1941 in which he killed, which is about 26 comics he appeared in, compared to the thousands since then.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Then read that comic instead of accusing me of lying or making statements about something I dont know. Im not tRUERtOtHEcORE. I read and make statements when Im fully sure what Im talking about, not hearsays or guesses. Its amazing how some are trying to weasel out of the facts even after so many blatant examples are shown

But...it's true that you don't know. You haven't read the comic and don't know the context, all you have done is post two panels from another site, and the site itself does not explain the context either, so how can I judge whether it's the same situation as in Axis Chemicals, the way I regard it anyway, ie it was unnecesary bloodshed.

You are the one who has 'weaseled out' of taking onboard my points, it's not about whether Batman has ever killed anyone in the books, it's about whether he has ever killed a bunch of crooks in cold blood, where there were other options to take them down.

I don't like that Axis Chemicals scene in Burton's film because it mis-represents the character, to the point where it is an insult.
Anyone can be a murderer and go around shooting the place up and blowing folk up with explosives in cold blood. The scene is basically saying anyone can be Batman with enough money, which is not true.

 

[バット人]

Well, in Man of Steel should Superman be unable to fly, have no vision powers etc and should kill too. He's done all those things in the past.

In Silver Age continuity (1954-1986) he killed about 5 people, in DCU continuity (1986-2011), Batman has only killed about 10 people max and in DCnU he hasn't at all. It was only ever a brief period from 1939 to to 1941 in which he killed, which is about 26 comics he appeared in, compared to the thousands since then.

See, the argument is, "Batman has never killed in the comics". I don't care what age, what issues or what circumstances there are, you can't pick and choose interpretations to twist and support your argument.

The fact of the matter is Batman has killed, period. It doesn't matter if it's a majority of stories or not. So, because the initial Batman stories had a killer Batman and it was only a few dozen comics where he killed, it shouldn't count? Okay then, lets disregard those early Detective Comics, oh wait, oops, no Batman.

There's a difference between "your interpretation of Batman" and "THE Batman". "THE Batman" can be anything from a dark, creature of the night or a smiling, "aw chucks", deputy of the law. There is no validity, so essentially it is all "comic accurate" and it depends entirely on one's personal taste.

I don't see what the problem is.

 

[GothamAlleys]

But...it's true that you don't know. You haven't read the comic and don't know the context, all you have done is post two panels from another site, and the site itself does not explain the context either, so how can I judge whether it's the same situation as in Axis Chemicals, the way I regard it anyway, ie it was unnecesary bloodshed.

You are the one who has 'weaseled out' of taking onboard my points, it's not about whether Batman has ever killed anyone in the books, it's about whether he has ever killed a bunch of crooks in cold blood, where there were other options to take them down.

I don't like that Axis Chemicals scene in Burton's film because it mis-represents the character, to the point where it is an insult.
Anyone can be a murderer and go around shooting the place up and blowing folk up with explosives in cold blood. The scene is basically saying anyone can be Batman with enough money, which is not true.

Its no matter how many examples I post, no matter what examples I post, theres always going to be some :but: from you. Its pointless. Youre right, batman doesnt kill. he never did. I just twist facts to make other believe he ever did, I drew those comics myself

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Its no matter how many examples I post, no matter what examples I post, theres always going to be some :but: from you. Its pointless. Youre right, batman doesnt kill. he never did. I just twist facts to make other believe he ever did, I drew those comics myself

Ok man, again you are dodging my point about the morals of Axis Chemical scene, so i'm gonna ask you point blank so you can't avoid it...

*I am talking about mis-representing Batman as a murderer, not as someone who has taken life.*


Do you know the difference between killing in defence and being a murderer?

*You can kill people and not be a murderer.*

Cops arn't allowed to go round just blowing criminals away, they are only allowed kill in self defence, or in the *immediate* defence of others.
and following this same rule keeps Batman a hero.
It's not semantics, it's about mis-representing the character onscreen, and that's what the Axis chemicals scene does, it mis-represents Batman as a murderer.
Your argument for why Batman had to blow up the factory was poor, so you have just fell back on insulting me as 'weasling out' of an argument, very poor form mate.
I have a feeling this will be our last debate.

 

[GothamAlleys]

And I already adressed that. Machine gunning people from the air, hanging people and blowing up buildings or ships with them isnt self defense.

 

[バット人]

If purposely breaking necks and shooting unarmed villains in cold blood is self defense well hot damn, count me in!

Plus, was Batman even in the Batmobile? I'm not apologizing for the character here but programming the Batmobile to go into the heart of a factory that's making poisonous products headed by a madman and destroy it is a little different then driving in yourself, machine guns blazing, taking out thugs one at a time behind the wheel.

Unless I'm mistaken, voice commanding a vehicle from a good distance away to blow up a factory is a TAD different from driving in like a madman, taking out as many thugs as you can before blowing up the place but that's just me.

 

[バット人]

If purposely breaking necks and shooting unarmed villains in cold blood is self defense well hot damn, count me in!

Plus, was Batman even in the Batmobile? I'm not apologizing for the character here but programming the Batmobile to go into the heart of a factory that's making poisonous products headed by a madman and destroy it is a little different then driving in yourself, machine guns blazing, taking out thugs one at a time behind the wheel.

Unless I'm mistaken, voice commanding a vehicle from a good distance away to blow up a factory is a TAD different from driving in like a madman, taking out as many thugs as you can before blowing up the place but that's just me.

 

[Mister Meddle]

He wasn't in the Batmobile. It was probably at a time when you wouldn't expect workers to be present. But why should Batman care if a few crooks were blown up? It's better to let them go along with the factory that produced the deadly toxin than having even more innocent people dropping dead like flies.

 

[El Payaso]

Well, in Man of Steel should Superman be unable to fly, have no vision powers etc and should kill too. He's done all those things in the past.

In Silver Age continuity (1954-1986) he killed about 5 people, in DCU continuity (1986-2011), Batman has only killed about 10 people max and in DCnU he hasn't at all. It was only ever a brief period from 1939 to to 1941 in which he killed, which is about 26 comics he appeared in, compared to the thousands since then.

Oh, and Batman has had Robin for 99% of his career. He appeared after only 1 year.

But le oh no. Nolan and Burton never used him. He never existed in any movie of any of those directors. Treasonous!

 

[GothamAlleys]

And Joker was a physical match for batman in just the firt 2 issues of his appearance. What a blasphemy that TDK went back to those first 2 issues and used so many ideas from it!

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Oh, and Batman has had Robin for 99% of his career. He appeared after only 1 year.

But le oh no. Nolan and Burton never used him. He never existed in any movie of any of those directors. Treasonous!

Actually, Tim Burton really wanted to put Robin in his Batman films. He was in Batman '89, but cut out by producers, then when Batman Returns was going to be a two parter along with Batman Continues he was going to have Robin. Then when Batman Returns came out, it was supposed to be the Marlon Wayans mechanic, but was written out due to an already filled plot.

But besides the only director who hasn't wanted to use Robin is Nolan, and to be fair, he has never said Robin doesn't exist in TDKR, admittedly, I don't expect to see him, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if he had a Thrillkiller type Robin in John Blake.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Thats not true. In every single interview he had he said the studio suggested it but he never wanted to do it and the producers didnt want it either. Eventually he got lucky cause it was decided that it wouldve been too many characters. He always kept repeating that Batman should stay in the shadows, not talk too much and be very folded within himself. A loner and outsider type

 

[ALP]

Its no matter how many examples I post, no matter what examples I post, theres always going to be some :but: from you. Its pointless. Youre right, batman doesnt kill. he never did. I just twist facts to make other believe he ever did, I drew those comics myself

You mastermind!

 

[バット人]

Bull, you can tell that Burton was vehemently AGAINST the idea of any kind of Robin character.

In fact, he was kind of like how Nolan was before this "epic conclusion" stuff came along. Basically, if the studios didn't push for Robin, Burton wouldn't use him but the character could be utilized somewhere down the line in the future, either by him or by someone else eventually.

 

[ALP]

Actually, Tim Burton really wanted to put Robin in his Batman films. He was in Batman '89, but cut out by producers, then when Batman Returns was going to be a two parter along with Batman Continues he was going to have Robin. Then when Batman Returns came out, it was supposed to be the Marlon Wayans mechanic, but was written out due to an already filled plot.

But besides the only director who hasn't wanted to use Robin is Nolan, and to be fair, he has never said Robin doesn't exist in TDKR, admittedly, I don't expect to see him, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if he had a Thrillkiller type Robin in John Blake.

You see to be stretching the facts to fit your own justification here. Burton never desperately wanted Robin in his films. He merely thought about it and decided against it on his own. Remember, he had full creative control over Batman Returns. If he wanted Robin in that film, he would have been in there.

Sam Hamm: "We had some huge structural challenges to work out. Originally Robin was suppose to be in the movie but the structure we worked out for the movie really did not admit Robin."

Tim Burton: "I think almost everybody across the board were happy with no Robin. I can't recall one person that was going 'we gotta have Robin'."

Michael Uslan: "There's also a historic reason why Robin shouldn't be in B'89 because in the first year of the comics, Batman worked solo."



Batman Returns:

Dan Waters: "We got very little directives from the studio like 'you must have Robin.' There was none of that really. We did try something (with Robin). Tim was big about not making a big deal about it. We wanted to maybe work in a Robin character but I could tell Tim was not enthusiastic about it from the get-go."

Tim Burton: "At some point there was a discussion of Robin. And again, the only way I could see it was try and find a profile that worked. But what ended up happening... but at the end of it all, we realized we had too many characters. And even without Robin, people would complain there's too many characters. But maybe in the third or fourth film."

 

[El Payaso]

Actually, Tim Burton really wanted to put Robin in his Batman films. He was in Batman '89, but cut out by producers, then when Batman Returns was going to be a two parter along with Batman Continues he was going to have Robin. Then when Batman Returns came out, it was supposed to be the Marlon Wayans mechanic, but was written out due to an already filled plot.

I think the writers tried. but I've never heard Burton saying anything pro-obin "We really tried but sadly we copuldn't." On the contrary, like ALP says, he said that nobody cared about the character.

But besides the only director who hasn't wanted to use Robin is Nolan, and to be fair, he has never said Robin doesn't exist in TDKR, admittedly, I don't expect to see him, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if he had a Thrillkiller type Robin in John Blake.

Yeah, Nolan has never said Robin doesn't exist. He's just telling Batman's career without him. Which is, you know, the same thing.

 

[Lead Cenobite]

How did a thread about Batman Forever turn into an argument about the merits of the Burton movies?

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

And I already adressed that. Machine gunning people from the air, hanging people and blowing up buildings or ships with them isnt self defense.

Again, you are deliberatly avoiding another point of my argument. Self defence isn't the only reason to excuse him from being a murderer, killing in the immediate defence of others, as i said, is also valid. It's not the same as the Axis Chemicals scene if he is doing it in the immediate defence of other people.
See that image you posted of him shooting from the plane? Well, you don't see it there(presumably because it is cropped), but iirc there is a speech bubble in that panel with Batman saying 'I hate taking human life, but here there is no choice...' or words to that effect. and iirc, that is from the same situation where he hangs the Hugo Strange monster man from the plane, as he sees no choice but to kill them when they are on their rampage.
That's not the case with the Axis Chemicals scene, there was a choice, there were other options.

and neither of us know the context of those two panels where the bat-wing/plane blows up a building, so it's not proof of anything until we know, right?

 

[El Payaso]

How did a thread about Batman Forever turn into an argument about the merits of the Burton movies?

Same as usual: one single person thinks that it'd be fun to bash a movie that he personally dislikes in a different movie's thread.

Again, you are deliberatly avoiding another point of my argument. Self defence isn't the only reason to excuse him from being a murderer, killing in the immediate defence of others, as i said, is also valid. It's not the same as the Axis Chemicals scene if he is doing it in the immediate defence of other people.
See that image you posted of him shooting from the plane? Well, you don't see it there(presumably because it is cropped), but iirc there is a speech bubble in that panel with Batman saying 'I hate taking human life, but here there is no choice...' or words to that effect. and iirc, that is from the same situation where he hangs the Hugo Strange monster man from the plane, as he sees no choice but to kill them when they are on their rampage.
That's not the case with the Axis Chemicals scene, there was a choice, there were other options.

and neither of us know the context of those two panels where the bat-wing/plane blows up a building, so it's not proof of anything until we know, right?

Look, the mere presence of the Batmobile machine-gunning should have been warning enough to those thugs. If they wanted to stay, it's their choice.

That said, Batman also had a choice to save Ra's al Ghul in that train and..... yes....

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

I think the writers tried. but I've never heard Burton saying anything pro-obin "We really tried but sadly we copuldn't." On the contrary, like ALP says, he said that nobody cared about the character.

Yeah, I was mistaken it was Sam Hamm who wanted Robin in the films, but both his scripts for Batman and Batman Returns had him written out. Tim Burton was entirely apathetic to most of the development.

Yeah, Nolan has never said Robin doesn't exist. He's just telling Batman's career without him. Which is, you know, the same thing.

Wait, you've seen The Dark Knight Rises? How does it end? Actually, don't tell me, just gimme hints! Nah, obviously I'm not expecting Robin in the capacity he was in Forever, but a lot of places (hell, even BoF) is reporting the possibility of John Blake fulfilling a Robin role. Personally, I'd rather see him as a Thrillkiller style Robin throughout the film rather than the Batman replacement.

 

[El Payaso]

Yeah, I was mistaken it was Sam Hamm who wanted Robin in the films, but both his scripts for Batman and Batman Returns had him written out. Tim Burton was entirely apathetic to most of the development.

Samm Hamm's a funny guy.

He literally puts his hands to the air claiming he didn't come up with the idea of Joker killing the Waynes and Alfred taking Vicky to the bat-cave. Yet he was against Batman wearing his cape.

Wait, you've seen The Dark Knight Rises? How does it end? Actually, don't tell me, just gimme hints! Nah, obviously I'm not expecting Robin in the capacity he was in Forever, but a lot of places (hell, even BoF) is reporting the possibility of John Blake fulfilling a Robin role. Personally, I'd rather see him as a Thrillkiller style Robin throughout the film rather than the Batman replacement.

There will be no Robin, take it from me. A different character filling the role - if there happened to be one - doesn't cut it.

 

[GothamAlleys]

and neither of us know the context of those two panels where the bat-wing/plane blows up a building, so it's not proof of anything until we know, right?

Its really offensive what youre accusing me of. I would never claim or state things if I wouldnt know about them. Again, Im not truerToTheCore. Why would I be so bold and pompous to post a screencap if I wouldnt know the context and wouldnt read the comic book? Batman lead a masked group called The Body to the waterfront and bfirst threw some of them off the building then blew them off. They were a menace to the city, quick acting was required , as with Jokers gang where he had vitually no time for preemptive attack. And btw, in the same issue he also killed some of them off with his Batmobile