The Dark Knight To Bleach or Not to Bleach? That is the Question

[kid bosco]

Exactly, this line of madness leads to it's own "escalation".

Pretty soon you've got Batman packing heat in Batman 3 and some jerk going "well in the golden age....".

Oye, speaking of work, I'm outta here. I'll get over this and enjoy the movie eventually, but c'mon guys, admit it, Hollywood d**ks with the stuff we love, and you simply can't just go along with it all the time. Eventually you'll be looking for excuses why Sandman shooting Uncle Ben by accident "works".

Peace.

You're kidding right?



................Right??

 

[ForestAflame]

But don't we all?
What makes you any different, other than being one in a very few turned off from wanting to see one of the best ( if not THE best ) film of the summer?
And over.........Nothing.

It's something to him.

And how do you know it's one of the best films of the summer?
Did you see it?

 

[undyingsoul]

for the record I have NEVER said anything on the subject of Burton Vs. Nolan because IMO there isn't such a thing they are two different directors with totally different styles with two entirely different takes on the batman and I enjoy them both because they were both GOOD but each will have it's pros and cons and even though I loath schumacher's version It's still a different vision so we really shouldn't put these guys into competition with each other.

 

[nickyg641]

for the record I have NEVER said anything on the subject of Burton Vs. Nolan because IMO there isn't such a thing they are two different directors with totally different styles with two entirely different takes on the batman and I enjoy them both because they were both GOOD but each will have it's pros and cons and even though I loath schumacher's version It's still a different vision so we really shouldn't put these guys into competition with each other.

It's not you; it was just a general observation about rabid fanboyism.

 

[itsthebatman]

I don't see all the fuss about the guns: after all, it's just 'Rubber bullets. Honest.'

In general, the more I hear about this movie, the more ecited I am, that it will be a good representation of Batman's world. The only two things that still really bug me are the make-up and the suit, and they've been problems for a while, enough to digest and accept. Even the little snippet from the set visit today, about Batman scanning the bank notes, shows him being more of a detective than before, fulfilling one of the things most of us wanted to see. Great stuff.

 

[Keyser Soze]

Exactly, this line of madness leads to it's own "escalation".

Pretty soon you've got Batman packing heat in Batman 3 and some jerk going "well in the golden age....".

Oye, speaking of work, I'm outta here. I'll get over this and enjoy the movie eventually, but c'mon guys, admit it, Hollywood d**ks with the stuff we love, and you simply can't just go along with it all the time. Eventually you'll be looking for excuses why Sandman shooting Uncle Ben by accident "works".

Peace.

In turn, YOUR line of madness leads to its own "escalation".

If you're too squeamish for Batman to have guns on his Batpod because "he might kill somebody", what next? Take away his grappling gun, because if he fired it at someone close range it might impale them! Take away the spikes in his gauntlets, because if he hit someone at the wrong angle he might slip their throat! In fact, if he confronts a criminal with a heart condition, he might scare them to death, so perhaps he should abandon the Batman persona all-together! Otherwise he risks potentially breaking his no-kill rule by accident.

 

[The Shape]

In turn, YOUR line of madness leads to its own "escalation".

If you're too squeamish for Batman to have guns on his Batpod because "he might kill somebody", what next? Take away his grappling gun, because if he fired it at someone close range it might impale them! Take away the spikes in his gauntlets, because if he hit someone at the wrong angle he might slip their throat! In fact, if he confronts a criminal with a heart condition, he might scare them to death, so perhaps he should abandon the Batman persona all-together! Otherwise he risks potentially breaking his no-kill rule by accident.

Amen.

 

[JayTee]

...annnnnd I'm chillin' at home.

In turn, YOUR line of madness leads to its own "escalation".

If you're too squeamish for Batman to have guns on his Batpod because "he might kill somebody", what next? Take away his grappling gun, because if he fired it at someone close range it might impale them! Take away the spikes in his gauntlets, because if he hit someone at the wrong angle he might slip their throat! In fact, if he confronts a criminal with a heart condition, he might scare them to death, so perhaps he should abandon the Batman persona all-together! Otherwise he risks potentially breaking his no-kill rule by accident.

C'mon, really?

Batman to me is the guy that wouldn't sign off on Lex Luthor's weapons deal because "I don't like guns." in World's Finest.

Is this really that hard? Do some of you just love Nolan that much?

I just don't get how they could spend a portion of Batman Begins showing in full detail why he doesn't use guns or believe in revenge only to interject both into the new movie. Is this because of Goyer's absence? Whine all you want about his one liners, but I'm starting to think he's the one who kept Nolan from flying off the tracks last time.

 

[hegele]

Batman isn't an idiot. Just because he has guns on his pod doesn't mean he'll pull the trigger on people. He (as seen in trailers) probably just uses them to shoot his way through things.

 

[Crook]

There's always been two rules associated with the character:

"I won't kill" and "I don't like guns"

In this case, Nolan twisted the first one and chose to ignore the second one.

 

[JayTee]

Right, like in Batman 89 with the wall to the factory, but isn't part of the reason Batman Begins was so great walking out of that theatre because you saw the scene of him throwing the gun in the water? Almost as if to say "THIS is how you do this movie."

Obstacles to be shot at specifically by machine guns are only there because writers and directors demand them to be.

 

[bonesawmcgraw]

I've been coming to this site since it was spidermanhype.com.

I think not.

Look at my post history and find some lovely contradictions. I've been excited about this movie for quite some time, now the closer we get, and the more I know about it, the less it's becoming the definitive Batman movie I'd always wanted.

*sigh

That's very sad. I feel for you and also wish that you could enjoy the movie too. I'll keep you in mind July 18... assuming I'll remember.

 

[itsthebatman]

...annnnnd I'm chillin' at home.



C'mon, really?

Batman to me is the guy that wouldn't sign off on Lex Luthor's weapons deal because "I don't like guns." in World's Finest.

Is this really that hard? Do some of you just love Nolan that much?

I just don't get how they could spend a portion of Batman Begins showing in full detail why he doesn't use guns or believe in revenge only to interject both into the new movie. Is this because of Goyer's absence? Whine all you want about his one liners, but I'm starting to think he's the one who kept Nolan from flying off the tracks last time.

The guy does hate guns, it has to be said.
Where in the new movie does he become vengeful - this is speculation at this point.
Goyer had a hand writing the treatment this time, so hopefully kept Chris on the straight and narrow this time.

 

[The Shape]

There's always been two rules associated with the character:

"I won't kill" and "I don't like guns"

In this case, Nolan twisted the first one and chose to ignore the second one.

Burton took those two rules and changed them to:

"I kill" and "I like guns"

 

[itsthebatman]

There's always been two rules associated with the character:

"I won't kill" and "I don't like guns"

In this case, Nolan twisted the first one and chose to ignore the second one.

'I have issues with the early deaths of my parents and deal with them by dressing up in Halloween costume' is the third one you missed out on. He didn't ignore the guns rule in BB, and until we see TDK, we don't know what he does with the guns.
Batman has blown stuff up in the comics, right, making sure there are no civilians in harms way? Is it Ok to use bombs, but not guns?

 

[The Shape]

'I have issues with the early deaths of my parents and deal with them by dressing up in Halloween costume' is the third one you missed out on. He didn't ignore the guns rule in BB, and until we see TDK, we don't know what he does with the guns.
Batman has blown stuff up in the comics, right, making sure there are no civilians in harms way? Is it Ok to use bombs, but not guns?

Yeah, that doesn't make sense to me. Batman can use bombs and rockets, but not guns.

The guns on the Batpod will be used the same way they have been used on the Batmobile for years.

 

[gwynplaine]

'I have issues with the early deaths of my parents and deal with them by dressing up in Halloween costume' is the third one you missed out on. He didn't ignore the guns rule in BB, and until we see TDK, we don't know what he does with the guns.
Batman has blown stuff up in the comics, right, making sure there are no civilians in harms way? Is it Ok to use bombs, but not guns?

I love your sig , it makes me think of John Cazale (Fredo). Now that would also have been an interesting Joker (specially circa "Dog day afternoon, another masterpiece).

 

[undyingsoul]

It's not you; it was just a general observation about rabid fanboyism.

Yea I knew you didn't mean me, I was setting the record straight.

 

[batman11]

It won't ruin the movie for me since everything is so spot on, however, if I see Batman fire a single bullet from that Bat-Pod, I will walk right the hell out. That's my one and only deal breaker on this movie.

Were you dropped on your head as a child?

 

[Crook]

Burton took those two rules and changed them to:

"I kill" and "I like guns"

Ok? Were you under the assumption Burton got a pass on that?

He didn't ignore the guns rule in BB

Bruce getting a hold of a gun and planning to kill someone with it, isn't ignoring the rule in some shape or form?

and until we see TDK, we don't know what he does with the guns.
Batman has blown stuff up in the comics, right, making sure there are no civilians in harms way? Is it Ok to use bombs, but not guns?

Well when you acquire guns, you have every intent to shoot someone with it if you use it, no? Bombs/explosives can do the job of tearing things down with the precaution of not harming anyone in the way.

But if the batpod is a military vehicle, then I can understand why it'd have such weapons. As you said, we'll have to see.

 

[Keyser Soze]

...annnnnd I'm chillin' at home.



C'mon, really?

Batman to me is the guy that wouldn't sign off on Lex Luthor's weapons deal because "I don't like guns." in World's Finest.

Is this really that hard? Do some of you just love Nolan that much?

I just don't get how they could spend a portion of Batman Begins showing in full detail why he doesn't use guns or believe in revenge only to interject both into the new movie. Is this because of Goyer's absence? Whine all you want about his one liners, but I'm starting to think he's the one who kept Nolan from flying off the tracks last time.

You're choosing, for whatever reason, to fetishise the physical guns themselves, rather than the actual moral issue of using them to kill. Yes, Bruce Wayne threw a gun into the river in "Begins". But as Batman, he also made one thug shoot another one in the foot. Batman is against killing, that is of course central to his character. No guns may be supplementary to that, in that he's not going to run around with Uzis, but making out having guns included on the Batpod as some character-ruining, film-ruining travesty is just being melodramatic.

So yes, really, my example still stands. Because what you're complaining about, is Batman making use of a tool that he has NO INTENTION of using to kill anyone, but which might feasibly be a tool which, if he so wished, he could use to kill someone. That's essentially your problem. And so, by that logic, we must therefore add everything in Batman's arsenal which might feasibly be able to kill someone into the list of things which will destroy the movie. We must also add the Batmobile to the list, too, as, if Batman so chose, he could use it to run over people.

If Batman starts driving around the streets on the Batpod, using the guns to shoot and kill every criminal he passes, then your complaint will have the slightest bit of relevance. But until then, you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[MAKIEVELLI]

It is a very delicate line. I absolutely love the idea of the guns on the vehincles as long as they are not, no matter the circumstances, used on people. However, I would launch a rebellion if Batman ever started carrying a firearm. I guess its ok as long as it is on his vehincle and is never used on anybody.

 

[The Shape]

Bruce getting a hold of a gun and planning to kill someone with it, isn't ignoring the rule in some shape or form?

Not at all. That was pre-Batman Bruce, a lost soul, contemplating using a gun to get revenge. This was before his moral code was set in place.

Are you being sarcastic here or something, or did you really think Nolan ignored the rule by having that in the movie?

 

[gwynplaine]

I loved when Batman was killing people left and right in his first appearances. Does that make me a bad person ? t:
I also love the fact that he isn't killing anymore, it makes it appear like he has become a better person throughout time.
If a lunatic who dresses as a bat can learn, so can we.

 

[Crook]

Not at all. That was pre-Batman Bruce, a lost soul, contemplating using a gun to get revenge. This was before his moral code was set in place.

Are you being sarcastic here or something, or did you really think Nolan ignored the rule by having that in the movie?

If you wanna be extremely technical about it, the "no guns" rule (in canon) was well in-place way before Bruce donned the cape and cowl.

Honestly, and this isn't directed at you, but the pre-Batman argument is such a copout and lousy excuse. There are certain things that go in line with being a rookie, but there's a difference between making amateur mistakes and shaping one's core set of values and moral code.