RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,349
Posts: 5,502,650
Members: 25,120
Currently online: 614
Newest member: Gaytrekgeek

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11

Frakes: Sign Me Up!
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 4 2013, 03:20 AM   #31
xortex
Commodore
 
Location: Staten Island, NY
Re: Is Batman crazy?

What about TDKR? The latest one.
xortex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4 2013, 03:25 AM   #32
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
Re: Is Batman crazy?

xortex wrote: View Post
What about TDKR? The latest one.
What about it?
__________________
Nerys Myk
Santa Kang is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 4 2013, 03:39 AM   #33
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Is Batman crazy?

Marc wrote: View Post
I wouldn't say Batman is out for revenge - he's out to stop the suffering of others at the hands of criminal.
Exactly. Thank you. That whole "I am vengeance" thing is completely wrong. If Batman were about revenge, he would've killed Joe Chill and left it at that. He's about justice. He's about stopping criminals and protecting the innocent. It's not about himself, it's about everyone else he can save from suffering the same kind of tragedy he lived through.

This is one of the many, many things the Burton movies got very wrong about Batman. Having the Joker/Napier be his parents' killer reduces it to a formulaic revenge movie, and Batman is about more than that. That's something Nolan got right -- what started him on the path to becoming Batman was Rachel convincing him to let go of revenge and focus on redressing the suffering of others instead of just his own.


Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
In most other versions the Waynes are killed by a two bit nobody armed robber named Joe Chill.
Or by a hitman named Joe Chill, hired by gangster Lew Moxon to assassinate Thomas Wayne in retaliation for getting him arrested, and to make it look like a random armed robbery. That's the way it was retconned in 1956, and it stayed canonical until Crisis on Infinite Earths three decades later.

Wasn't Chill hired by the League of Shadows in the Nolan version? I have the impression that the League had the Waynes killed because their philanthropy was countering the decay of Gotham that the League was trying to orchestrate. Or maybe that's just a theory I concocted.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 4 2013, 04:54 AM   #34
Gov Kodos
Admiral
 
Gov Kodos's Avatar
 
Location: Gov Kodos Regretably far from Boston
Re: Is Batman crazy?

Christopher wrote: View Post
Gov Kodos wrote: View Post
Fledermausman... He is a nutter. In real life he won't last very long, even if he might make the occasional amusing story.
But that's just it -- he doesn't exist in real life. He exists in a universe where gorillas can talk, dwarf-matter costumes can shrink people to microscopic size, emotions are color-coded as cosmic forces that can be harnessed as energy sources by space cops, gangs are bankrolled by evil gods from a planet called Apokolips, and both crimefighters and criminals all over the world have been donning colorful costumes and themed gadgets for generations. It isn't Batman that's crazy; it's his world that's crazy. Within the context of the world he inhabits, his behavior is perfectly normative and adaptive.

Indeed, turn it around. Take the most Bruce Wayne-like person in our world, a billionaire philanthropist who supports law enforcement and social reform without personally becoming a master martial artist and animal-themed ninja, and put him in the DC Universe. He wouldn't last very long there -- he'd probably be robbed blind by Catwoman or the Penguin or driven out of business by Lex Luthor or gunned down by Intergang within months. And people there might think he was crazy to think he could successfully fight crime without having a secret identity, fighting skills, or some kind of superpowers to protect him against the inevitable retaliation. By their standards, Batman's methods are the saner way to go.

I guess the problem is that most people are more familiar with screen versions of Batman and other superheroes than the comics version, and in most screen versions, the featured superhero is the only one around. Given that, it would seem more eccentric and bizarre. But even so, a lot of those versions of Batman occupy worlds that are crazier than ours -- particularly the Batman of the '66 sitcom and the Batman of the Burton and Schumacher movies. Those were two (three?) very stylized, exaggerated, campy alternative realities full of extreme, flamboyant criminals, so a flamboyant and eccentric approach to fighting crime wasn't such a bad fit. And when Nolan gave us a nominally more naturalistic world (though still one where the physical laws that govern microwaves, nuclear fusion, spinal injury recovery, and the like are quite fanciful), he went to great lengths to explain why adopting the Batman persona was not a delusional act, but a consciously created performance enacted by a rational man in order to achieve a specific purpose.
It was the attempt to make it naturalistic (such as it can be said to be so) that made Nolan's films a crashing bore for me. The more they tried to rationalize the character's world, the more idiotic and crazy Batman came off to me. I'll take 'Batman and Robin' any day over the whole of Nolan's films.
__________________
We are quicksilver, a fleeting shadow, a distant sound... our home has no boundaries beyond which we cannot pass. We live in music, in a flash of color... we live on the wind and in the sparkle of a star! Endora, Bewitched
Gov Kodos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4 2013, 09:08 PM   #35
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Is Batman crazy?

Gov Kodos wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote: View Post
Gov Kodos wrote: View Post
Fledermausman... He is a nutter. In real life he won't last very long, even if he might make the occasional amusing story.
But that's just it -- he doesn't exist in real life. He exists in a universe where gorillas can talk, dwarf-matter costumes can shrink people to microscopic size, emotions are color-coded as cosmic forces that can be harnessed as energy sources by space cops, gangs are bankrolled by evil gods from a planet called Apokolips, and both crimefighters and criminals all over the world have been donning colorful costumes and themed gadgets for generations. It isn't Batman that's crazy; it's his world that's crazy. Within the context of the world he inhabits, his behavior is perfectly normative and adaptive.

Indeed, turn it around. Take the most Bruce Wayne-like person in our world, a billionaire philanthropist who supports law enforcement and social reform without personally becoming a master martial artist and animal-themed ninja, and put him in the DC Universe. He wouldn't last very long there -- he'd probably be robbed blind by Catwoman or the Penguin or driven out of business by Lex Luthor or gunned down by Intergang within months. And people there might think he was crazy to think he could successfully fight crime without having a secret identity, fighting skills, or some kind of superpowers to protect him against the inevitable retaliation. By their standards, Batman's methods are the saner way to go.

I guess the problem is that most people are more familiar with screen versions of Batman and other superheroes than the comics version, and in most screen versions, the featured superhero is the only one around. Given that, it would seem more eccentric and bizarre. But even so, a lot of those versions of Batman occupy worlds that are crazier than ours -- particularly the Batman of the '66 sitcom and the Batman of the Burton and Schumacher movies. Those were two (three?) very stylized, exaggerated, campy alternative realities full of extreme, flamboyant criminals, so a flamboyant and eccentric approach to fighting crime wasn't such a bad fit. And when Nolan gave us a nominally more naturalistic world (though still one where the physical laws that govern microwaves, nuclear fusion, spinal injury recovery, and the like are quite fanciful), he went to great lengths to explain why adopting the Batman persona was not a delusional act, but a consciously created performance enacted by a rational man in order to achieve a specific purpose.
It was the attempt to make it naturalistic (such as it can be said to be so) that made Nolan's films a crashing bore for me. The more they tried to rationalize the character's world, the more idiotic and crazy Batman came off to me. I'll take 'Batman and Robin' any day over the whole of Nolan's films.

interesting point, which I somewhat agree with. I wouldn't go so far as to take the awful "batman and robin" over the Nolan trilogy, but I do think that the Burton films hold up pretty well with them. The problem with Nolan's "comic book realism" approach is that it ultimately becomes absurd. You're always going to have things in a comic book story that make it painfully obvious that what we're seeing just wouldn't work.

Heath Ledger's Joker COULD NOT have had so many different complex plans working out so well, that involve such careful timing, so many different connections, and a guy WHO WEARS CLOWN MAKE-UP IN PUBLIC AND HAS HORRIBLE FACIAL SCARS not getting noticed. You can't recover from a serious spinal injury in a few months by having it punched back into place, and then doing some prison push-ups and sit-ups. The juxtaposition of realism in terms of Wayne purchasing Batman equipment or something like that, with the absurd comic book conventions that were necessary to making the story work just came off as awkward sometimes.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Nolan trilogy, I just think they could have toned down the faux-realism.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4 2013, 10:57 PM   #36
Kelthaz
Rear Admiral
 
Kelthaz's Avatar
 
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Re: Is Batman crazy?

sonak wrote: View Post
The juxtaposition of realism in terms of Wayne purchasing Batman equipment or something like that, with the absurd comic book conventions that were necessary to making the story work just came off as awkward sometimes.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Nolan trilogy, I just think they could have toned down the faux-realism.
Yeah, I agree with this. Nolan's trilogy was very good, but it wasn't the focus on realism that made it memorable. If anything the focus on realism was detrimental to the whole product.
__________________
"Who are you?! And how did you get in here?!"

"I'm the locksmith. And... I'm the locksmith."
Kelthaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4 2013, 11:45 PM   #37
Marc
Fleet Admiral
 
Location: An Aussie in Canukistan
Send a message via ICQ to Marc
Re: Is Batman crazy?

sonak wrote: View Post
. You can't recover from a serious spinal injury in a few months by having it punched back into place, and then doing some prison push-ups and sit-ups. The juxtaposition of realism in terms of Wayne purchasing Batman equipment or something like that, with the absurd comic book conventions that were necessary to making the story work just came off as awkward sometimes.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Nolan trilogy, I just think they could have toned down the faux-realism.
Perhaps you'd have preferred to the story line from Knightfall where a woman with telekinetic healing powers repairs the damage to Bruce Wayne's back?
__________________
Gentlemen you can't fight in here - this is the war room.

Pres. Merkin P. Muffly
Marc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 5 2013, 12:34 AM   #38
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Rhovanion
Re: Is Batman crazy?

"I hope you can swim, Mr. Bane!" - Arnold Schwarzenegger
__________________
Whatever happens on earth, that up there, that's the endgame.
Set Harth is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 5 2013, 12:58 AM   #39
xortex
Commodore
 
Location: Staten Island, NY
Re: Is Batman crazy?

Maybe Batman is a robot created by the Gothem government to fight crime. It would explain alot of his super human strength and powers. After all he didn't get bitten by a bat or a vampire, unless he was a vampire robot - like an IRS tax worker. I once talked on the phone for twenty minutes with a robot without knowing it. We laughed and reminisced and carried on a real conversation. He even lied when I asked him if he was a robot, to which the woman who he passed me to said, 'yea, he's a robot.'
xortex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5 2013, 01:42 AM   #40
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Is Batman crazy?

Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
Frank Miller's All Star Batman? Yes.
Don't you mean Crazy Steve?
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5 2013, 01:44 AM   #41
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
Re: Is Batman crazy?

xortex wrote: View Post
Maybe Batman is a robot created by the Gothem government to fight crime. It would explain alot of his super human strength and powers. After all he didn't get bitten by a bat or a vampire, unless he was a vampire robot - like an IRS tax worker. I once talked on the phone for twenty minutes with a robot without knowing it. We laughed and reminisced and carried on a real conversation. He even lied when I asked him if he was a robot, to which the woman who he passed me to said, 'yea, he's a robot.'
He's a comic book character. He's exactly what the comics say he is.
__________________
Nerys Myk
Santa Kang is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 5 2013, 03:05 AM   #42
Ugly Sweater
Trekker4747
 
Ugly Sweater's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Is Batman crazy?

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
Frank Miller's All Star Batman? Yes.
Don't you mean Crazy Steve?
Yep, Crazy Steve and Dick Grayson Age Twelve.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.
Ugly Sweater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 08:29 PM   #43
Lapis Exilis
Rear Admiral
 
Lapis Exilis's Avatar
 
Location: Underground
Re: Is Batman crazy?

Christopher wrote: View Post

Wasn't Chill hired by the League of Shadows in the Nolan version? I have the impression that the League had the Waynes killed because their philanthropy was countering the decay of Gotham that the League was trying to orchestrate. Or maybe that's just a theory I concocted.
Chill wasn't hired by the League of Shadows. In fact, according to Ra's monologuing at the end of Batman Begins, his murder of the Waynes counteracted the League's plan to drag Gotham down via the depression. He says something along the lines of "their deaths galvanized the rich and powerful, and Gotham has limped along since then" It was a bit of a tortured explanation...

My issue with Nolan's world is that - I like the more naturalistic take, but he had trouble making the Grand Batman Plan hold together. I mean, kudos to him for trying to create a Grand Batman Plan, since in the comics, Bruce Wayne's plan is "I will kick criminal ass", which might help to prevent moments of individual suffering, but does lack a systemic idea for improving Gotham's lot - which I think is people's objection to him donning cape and cowl rather than concentrating his energies on philanthropy and social change. Though, personally I find the idea that a single person, no matter how rich, could have a significant, lasting impact on the crime situation in one of the world's largest cities to be a bit ridiculous in its own way.

The ultimate flaws in the Nolan universe are regrettable - there was a good idea in the whole League of Shadows trying to destroy Gotham as part of their centuries old task to correct humanity's decadence. The problem was, with this as the justification for the story's main nemesis, Gotham should have been shown to be much more corrupt. Much as I think Frank Miller went off the deep end when it comes to Batman, he does understand one basic tenet in regards to the character. He once said "Batman works best in a world that's gone to hell." A vigilante is a hero when the systems of justice actually work to create injustice. If Nolan had been able to establish more of a completely rotten, corrupt system, the whole thing would have worked better. The trilogy would have really rocked if he could have managed to make it that the League was losing its reason for existence in the modern world, so Ra's was secretly creating corruption in order to bring it down and justify the League going on. Like, the League found and loosed the Joker on Gotham when it appeared that Batman was causing real change in the city.

Still would've needed a completely different 3rd film than we got. What a jumbled mess that thing was.
__________________
Don't try to win over the haters; you're not the jackass whisperer. - Scott Straten
Lapis Exilis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 08:49 PM   #44
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Is Batman crazy?

^You make some interesting points, but I think it would've been a terrible idea to make the Joker just a pawn of the League. The essence of the character, especially that version thereof, is that he's a complete wild card, a random force of chaos, answering to no one and having no history.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 11/16/14 including annotations for "The Caress of a Butterfly's Wing" and overview for DTI: The Collectors

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 8 2013, 09:09 PM   #45
DarthTom
Fleet Admiral
 
DarthTom's Avatar
 
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Re: Is Batman crazy?

Asbo Zaprudder wrote: View Post
He doesn't live in a cave, he lives in Wayne Manor -- but is he crazy? Most probably. Paranoid, delusional schizophrenic, nah. Dissociative Identity Disorder or Antisocial Personality Disorder, perhaps...

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...-health-part-1
Rich people aren't crazy they are eccentric. The fictional carrier Bruce Wayne was very rich.
DarthTom is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
batman

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.