I said BATMAN. Not BATMAN BEGINS. And I put it in bold, too. Here, I'll repost it:
Hey, let's argue whether or not it was ok for Batman to kill in BATMAN, given the "context of the story".
The context of the story didn't order Batman to kill.
You have, once again, missed the point and shown an absolute lack of knowledge of cinema.
I never said he wasn't believable. I said he was out of character. He doesn't come across as evil? Talking about assassinating Rachel, bringing in drugs...
What, and Falcone wasn't always plotting to kill people in The Long Halloween? He wasn't always searching for new ways to gain more power?
Read the book again, or I'll just provide the quotes for you.
I'm spoon-feeding you, now, you know...
Which point have I missed?
That Falcone is cliche in both adaptations.
You have missed the f*****g point, son.
So you think that Carmine Falcone is "a difficult to take down criminal that Bruce hates". Wow, are your interpretations of these characters shallow.
Eh?
My friend, when you make a statement such as this, this whole "you have stepped on your own toes thing", you have got to be damned sure you're right.
because there are no other characters who are renowned for running a criminal empire
Actually, there are: The Penguin, Rupert Thorne, Black Mask, Blockbuster, The Great White Shark, Ra's Al Ghul, Kobra, The King Snake, Killer Croc, and probably some more beyond that.
You do realize that you are, now, questioning the characterization of the comic-book Falcone, through implying that he isn't unique in Begins?
Falcone runs a criminal-empire within Gotham City; always evades arrest; is your average looking Joe; is a very old man; ALWAYS relies on others to do his dirty work... how isn't that unique, and I don't even know why I am arguing this?
You are now virtually arguing against
YOURSELF. Seems to me like Carmine Falcone just isn't for you...
Yes, most people do tend to be easily satisfied. That's never deterred me.
Lord knows how you are going to respond to Joker's "cliche" characterization in TDK, then...
I like how you can't point out any assessment I missed, you just talk about how I missed one. I'm simple? Could be worse, I could be rude.
You've missed the point of "cliche" characters -- assuming that Falcone was never cliche in the comics, when he f*****g is.
You have missed the point, Colin.
Hmm, you do realize that I was describing the COMIC-BOOK version there, don't you?
Falcone is corrupt in the comics, and when crossed, is not a nice man. Remember him putting a one-million dollar price-tag on Batman's and Catwoman's head in TLH???
So, if I'm not to believe what I see in one scene, what can I believe?
There are other scenes in the movie where isn't plain thuggery, you know...
Technically it was in several scenes that Falcone did what could be considered evil or "thuggish" things.
And now you are arguing that the character shouldn't always be plotting to gain more power over the city.
Right when I thought this argument couldn't possibly get any more ridiculous...
Could you quit saying "go figure"? It's one thing to not have a huge vocabulary. It's quite another to punctuate every few statements with the same thing.
Well, it seems to bother you so I'm just going to keep on saying it.
Gonna' cane me?
No, that is not my argument at all. Show me where I said this.
Seems to me like you're argument is changing, then. First, you were unhappy because the character wasn't as interesting and that his connection to the Wayne family wasn't as tied more into the story, and now you are arguing that Falcone wasn't Falcone in ONE SCENE, even though he WAS Falcone in that scene, because that's what he is in the comics:
A box of hatred waiting to unload.
Silly, you are.
I think you mean since when was it a God-given right that Falcone had NOT TO BE TAKEN DOWN WITHIN A MONTH.
I never said I had an issue with the timeframe he was taken down in. I'm simply pointing out the obvious difference between the film Falcone and the comic book version.
If you don't have an issue with it, or if you
UNDERSTAND it, then why point it out?
If you understand why Falcone being taken out pretty quickly was FOR THE BETTER, then you wouldn't even need to bring that up to argue your point.
Those toes are probably bruised by now...
Yes, to illustrate Batman's capability and the impact he would have on Gotham's crime, and to highlight Gordon's realization about how effective he would be.
Lord knows why you brought up the comic-book thing, then -- if you understand that why this took place, and thereby understanding that it does nothing to strengthen your argument.
You said it again? Tell me truthfully...is this an OCD thing? I don't want to bug you about it if it's an OCD thing. That would be cruel.
Yeah -- it's an OCD thing.
See how you don't get to me? I ARE INTERNETZ PROOFIZZ!!
And if he wasn't? Would you be ok with it?
I'd have faith in Nolan's handling of the character.
Uh...you're basing this assessment on what, exactly?
The fact that you wanted to see a more "interesting" character.
Oh, that's right -- your argument has changed, now. What you are really unhappy with is how mean Falcone is to Bruce.
Unbelievable, and I can't believe you cannot see the ineptitude and frequently altering state of this totally fallaciously constructed argument.
When did Bruce insult Falcone?
Through confronting him, obviously.
Why do you think he pulled a gun on him? Because Bruce pissed him the f**k off, dude.
Once again, why am I being asked to ignore the scene where he's out of character in favor of the others?
Out of character?
Yeah, and it's not like Falcone ever puts a one-million dollar price tag on someone's head in the comics, is it? Seems pretty in-character to me.
I must. Seeing as how I don't find badmouthing people's dead parents, beating someone when they're down, drug running, getting murderers out of jailtime and having people murdered "respectable" in the least.
FFS -- HE'S NOT MEANT TO BE RESPECTABLE IN THAT SCENE.
Grrr... you are so...*cringes*...silly and unreasonable.
Prove to me that I don't understand Falcone's use in the film. Prove it.
The answers lays within the sights of the beholder...
And should I ignore this rather pivotal scene?
Not at all, because it's totally in-character.
No, I just like to quote it.
Eh?
Hmm...something where he did more then engage in the average crime boss's "actions" and "attitude".
He did, in the other scenes I keep referring to.
Go figure.
So is the Joker in TDK. So is Bruce in Batman. So is Superman in Donner's films. So is Obi-Wan Kenobi.
Cinema, in of itself, is a great, big recycling cliche. You need to study it before running your mouth off in a debate similar to this...
It was tied into the story
Now we're cooking on gas!!
but in a very forced manner
...in your opinion.
The speech was incredibly relevant to the story, and only made Falcone's character a damn, side more interesting.
I wouldn't call the speech itself cliche
F**k me, you do some tossing-and-turning...
but it didn't reveal anything about Falcone's character that isn't a cliche.
What. The. F**k?
I've just gone bog-eyed.
Oooh, the power of fear. Never seen that angle before.
"Oh, you killed my parents -- I am going to turn super-good!"
Never seen that angle, before, right?
I mean, almost every mob boss/criminal character ever written has that angle to them somewhere.
Same goes for every cop, superhero or super villain. At the core of each characters lays the same message, does it not?
I don't think you know what my argument even is
I don't, because it keeps f*****g changing.
It's amusing that rather than ask me for clarification, you just jump to conclusions about what it is and how I feel about various elements of the film and comics.
I wouldn't even want to waste my time listening to you blabber on about your all-encompassing viewpoints for the film...I'd much rather just sit here and make a mockery out of your points.
No, while he had more screentime, he was closer to his comic book
Which ties into my earlier point about Falcone.
With more scenes, he might have been more polite to people. Those scenes weren't there, but you never know...
It isn't screentime alone that accomplished the more faithful portrayal of Gordon than in the past. It was his manner of speech, his attitude, and his actions in each scene he was in.
Manner of speech?
"The Bat or the Cat"
That sounds very much like a thugs way of referring to Batman. Who said that? IT WAS FALCONE!!! ZING, ZING, ZING!!!
Screentime helped with fleshing out the character, and with adding more depth to him and his struggles. It didn't help with how faithful the portrayal was.
And yet, Falcone's character was very faithful to the comics.
I fail to see why the Bruce/Falcone scene couldn't have gone down with Falcone being more respectful and refined around Bruce.
NARRATIVE.
For the life of me...
I mean, unless you just HAVE to see Bruce's whole "hold me back" thing. Which, come to think of it, you still could have had
No one's said anything like that. That's just you and your fictional way of creating another person's argument.
Silly.
Nope. Wasn't the screentime. It was the CONTENT of that time. It was what was SHOWN about Alfred in this, compared to past versions.
And yet, the "content" of Falcone was very faithful to the comic-book truths of the character, because he was thuggish, hateful and even police and laid-back at times.
How isn't that an accurate description of the comic-book adaptation of Carmine Falcone, oh knowledgeable and all-knowing one?
No, you haven't been saying that "all along". You resorted to that quite recently, actually, and the screentime thing doesn't matter, because what they may have done with more isn't my issue. My issue is that they didn't use the screentime they had to show a faithful version of Carmine Falcone.
According to who?
You, I'm guessing? I saw a very accurate portrayal of Carmine Falcone. All you have to do is open up The Long Halloween.
It's not about screentime, and you're delusional if you think it is
It's
very much about screentime. A character can be fleshed out a lot more, given more screentime. You might even have got to see Falcone being ever MORE respectful, given more screen time. Gordon got more screen time so we just about got to see how he reacts in EVERY normal situation.
Go figure.
The Joker will have less screentime than Jack Nicholson had in BATMAN in THE DARK KNIGHT. Will the better portrayal of the character be attributed to screentime, or what is shown about the character?
If the Joker was given three or four scenes, then we wouldn't get to know this character.
Again, your fictional knowledge of cinema prevails.
1. Do you see me complaining about the character not passing people drinks?
2. Yes he does pass Flass a drink in BATMAN BEGINS. So what?
3. In THE LONG HALLOWEEN, he has someone do it FOR him, indicating a markedly different character approach to such things. He's also in a different environment, as I recall.
Hey, you were the one insisting that Falcone in Begins wasn't an "ounce" like Falcone in the comics...
Go figure.
I can imagine him saying it, too.
Ah...so Falcone is SLIGHTLY reminiscent to the Falcone from the comics? That's weird, because I seem to remember you saying that Falcone wasn't an "ounce" like Falcone from the comics.
You are always changing your arguments. Do you not see this?
I have an issue with the Bruce/Falcone scene.
Because he was mean? I seem to remember Falcone being mean in The Long Halloween.
So because you quoted TWO lines from THE LONG HALLOWEEN (both mob boss cliches, btw)...Falcone was somehow faithful or interesting as a whole?
I wasn't the one complaining about Falcone not being an "ounce" like the Falcone we know from the comics...
Go figure.
I didn't say his tone was all wrong.
Progress.
said that scene was out of character.
Not at all. Another misconception of cinema. Nolan altered the character's background -- not his persona.
Realize the difference, because it is hindering your argument.
I don't have too many issues with the later Crane/Flass scenes, and have never claimed to.
Lovely.
More progress.
So much for Falcone not being at all like the comic-book version, right?
t:
Yes it is. Again, I don't mind if some cliche comes into play, as it's bound to
My point is slowly being proven...
I just don't want a whole CHARACTER that revolves around cliche.
Falcone is a cliche character. Even in the comics. You cross him and he puts a bounty on your head.
Hey, wasn't that done in Star Wars? Hey, isn't Darth Vader a cliche character? I'd hate to know what you thought about Emperor Palpatine, because he was a deeply cliche character, wasn't he?
Cliche isn't a bad thing at all. You are just struggling to maintain this argument, I'm afraid.
Do me a favor. Find me the post where I said "Falcone does nothing similar to or appropriate for his comic book character in the movie".
Find it.
You said he wasn't an "ounce" like his comic-book counterpart.
Your words, not mine.
If you don't believe me, go back a page or so.
Pretty damn shallow one. I mean, that could describe Bullock, Montoya, The Phantom or The Shadow's law enforcement liasons...
But it is being applied to a specific character. If I wanted to describe a character in detail -- I f*****g would.
I chose not to. I simply chose to give a short synopsis of a character. Kind of like how you would explain it to a newcomer.
F**k, you are so petty.
Right. And you seem to think it means "the most basic element of a character". And so far, that leads to apparently very shallow interpretations of characters on your part.
There is a difference between describing a character's actual persona, and their place within a specific universe.
Go the f**k figure, dude.
I never said the invented story isn't for the better.
And thus you might agree that making Falcone less connected to the Wayne family was for the better, too, then? Because it made that wonderful exchange between the two possible in Begins, and through that confrontation, the story got rolling and Bruce had an inspiration to travel the world to understand the criminal mind.
...all down to Falcone, that was.
I don't recall saying it destroyed the character. I just said it was contrived. Care to respond to that element of my statement, rather than this "straw argument" thing you're doing?
The League of Shadows having gun-powder sat openly is contrived.
Wayne Enterprises having survival suits and what not is contrived.
Doesn't mean it's not for the better, now, does it? It's done to serve the narrative. You don't know that, though -- that's why you keep putting your friggin' foot in it.
I uh, never said that he's not something of a cliche in the comics.
Then we are basically in agreement.
Well, that's all well and good for them. I found it forced and heavy handed. It's my opinion.
We'll agree to disagree.
As opposed to it being someone else's personal issue? What am I in denial about, exactly?
The fact that Falcone has always been a cliche character, and that cinema, in general, is all a great, big cliche.
If you understood this, or if you just accepted this, then you wouldn't have a problem with Falcone's portrayal in Batman Begins.
like how you ignore my actual statement to tell me how you'd feel. Do you really have that little self control that someone making a childish comment would piss you off?
Eh?
I was making a comparative statement, silly boy.
No, Bruce's dad didn't beg like a dog, but that doesn't mean that those comments aren't hurtful. My mum isn't a man, but I would still be insulted if someone said that to me, because I can understand the symbolic reference behind that insult.
"you am going to prove you wrong"?
You've got higher standard than me, remember?
)
