Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Wrong forum

Nice post. I agree with this part in particular.

I think his fight scenes in particular was probably the main draw, and then people tried to justify the rest.

The choreography really show cased his skill on a level that we haven't seen at all from any live-action film, and was a move in the right direction. I think it still hasn't reached "comic accuracy", but that I think will be difficult to do in a live action.

I've commented on this elsewhere, but I also think Batfleck's physique felt a little too bloated. Could be a little slimmer and agile-looking.

So...pretty much everything, then.

Originally posted by Kovert Potato
Nice post. I agree with this part in particular.

I think his fight scenes in particular was probably the main draw, and then people tried to justify the rest.

The choreography really show cased his skill on a level that we haven't seen at all from any live-action film, and was a move in the right direction. I think it still hasn't reached "comic accuracy", but that I think will be difficult to do in a live action.

Thanks. And yeah, I agree that even Batfleck's fighting style wasn't "comic accurate" either. He is far too reliant on brute strength and at one moment, he literally just punches a thug repeatedly, like a madman, and gets shot in the cowl.

Originally posted by Kovert Potato
I've commented on this elsewhere, but I also think Batfleck's physique felt a little too bloated. Could be a little slimmer and agile-looking.

I absolutely agree.

Originally posted by riv6672
So...pretty much everything, then.

No, that's not everything. There are other aspects too i.e. writing and characterization, which sucked and I explained why I think they sucks.

Well Batfleck is better at fighting than Baleman.

Originally posted by KingD19
Well Batfleck is better at fighting than Baleman.
Batfleck is better at breathing than Baleman.

Originally posted by KingD19
Well Batfleck is better at fighting than Baleman.

Perhaps, but Baleman is a better written Batman and Bale gives a better performance than Affleck imo.

fatfleck drinks more than baleman

Batfleck is far more badass than any Batman. You just look at the guy coming and think yeah this guy can take anyone. And then you see him in action.

Batman is a character defined by the fear he inspires. The most dangerous man on the planet, and he made sure everyone knew it. And even gods who failed to acknowledge it, he made them regret it

Keaton was too goofy. The smoke and mirrors Baleman who regularly got smacked around by ordinary goons in very small numbers made a terrible impreesion of the character. Him having his no kill rule didn't do anything when he was a weakling, and way before Batman had his no kill rule he still was someone nobody dared to cross. Not Balemook

Why hasn't he killed the Joker? For the same reason anyone trying to kill any incarnation of Joker fails. TvTropes called it Joker Immunity

Originally posted by HulkIsHulk
Batfleck is far more badass than any Batman. You just look at the guy coming and think yeah this guy can take anyone. And then you see him in action.


No, I absolutely do not think that Batfleck can take anyone. I won't deny that he has better feats than Baleman, I even acknowledged Batfleck's fight scenes and choreography as one of his redeeming qualities, but it's not even to make up for how much of a badly written character he is, as well as Snyder's poor explanation for why he is a killer. I was critizing the way his character was written, not the way he fought.

Originally posted by HulkIsHulk
Batman is a character defined by the fear he inspires. The most dangerous man on the planet, and he made sure everyone knew it. And even gods who failed to acknowledge it, he made them regret it

Yeah, one of Batman's core character traits is that he is a symbol of fear; a creature of the night. But it isn't because he is a sadistic edgelord (which he isn't, except in stories like All Star Batman and Robin which are terrible anyway). Part of what makes Batman terrifying in the eyes of his enemies is that he is calculating and methodical. He's also an enigma because people don't know if he is human or not (at least early on his career). Batfleck is intimidating for the wrong reasons. When Bruce got his back broken by Bane in Knightfall, Jean Paul Valley temporarily took on the mantle of Batman, but his methods were much more violent and rough because he brutalised criminals, which Tim Drake absolutely hated because it wasn't the kind of fear that Bruce used because it was too ruthless and brutal. Batfleck is even more violent than Jean was in Knightfall, because Jean refused to kill Bane even when Bane asked him to at the end of the Knightfall story arc. Batfleck is intimidating because he's a sadistic edgelord who brutally kills people, and his reasons for wanting Superman dead are absolutely retarded because he admits that he has no real evidence that Superman is a bad guy, and still wants him dead because of that 1% chance he might become a bad guy one day.

Originally posted by HulkIsHulk
Keaton was too goofy. The smoke and mirrors Baleman who regularly got smacked around by ordinary goons in very small numbers made a terrible impreesion of the character. Him having his no kill rule didn't do anything when he was a weakling, and way before Batman had his no kill rule he still was someone nobody dared to cross. Not Balemook

Baleman never regularly got smacked around by average goons in very small numbers. He never got smacked around when he fought at least 12 of Falcone's goons in his first full appearance in Begins. He never got smacked around by any of Scarecrow's goons in Begins. He never got smacked around by thugs or of Bane's mercenaries in TDKR. The only times he really struggled with goons was when he fought Joker's goons in the penthouse, and when he got tagged by Marone's goons in the nightclub (which he still shrugged off anyway). The latter happened when Baleman was fighting in a confined space that restricted his movements, and the former is the only legitimate low showing, which isn't really consistent with his other showings in Batman Begins and The Dark Knight Rises. And no, Baleman wasn't a weakling at all. In Batman Begins, there's a lot of choppy editing and shaky cam in the fight choreography, which got criticised a lot because they could barely see what was happening in the fight scenes. Nolan's explanation for the use of choppy editing and shaky cam was that he wanted to convey Baleman as "blindingly quick" and "animal like" from the perspective from Falcone's goons i.e. that he's literally a blur. Keep in mind that Baleman achieved all of this whilst wearing a heavy body armour that slows him down and restricts his movements in that it doesn't allow him to turn his neck independently of his body, which is something that no real life human would be able to acheive. Moreover, Baleman achieved this whilst fighting and being surrounded by at least 12 goons, and he incapacitates them all 21 seconds. So no, he's not a weakling. He might not be as good as Batfleck, but that doesn't make him a weakling.

Originally posted by HulkIsHulk
Why hasn't he killed the Joker? For the same reason anyone trying to kill any incarnation of Joker fails. TvTropes called it Joker Immunity

Yes, but there are in-universe reasons too that make sense, which is that Batman wants to kill Joker, but refuses because he's worried that he won't be able to stop killing if he kills the Joker (Under the Red Hood). And every time he has tried to kill the Joker in Post Crisis, it failed, either because the Joker recieved diplomatic immunity (A Death in the Family) and that Jim Gordon doesn't approve of Batman killing criminals (Batman: Hush). The DCEU doesn't even try to explain why the Joker is still alive despite Batfleck being a killer, so it's just really contrived. Not to mention, comics are a different medium than movies; comics can go on forever and are far more heightened, hence why comic book characters generally don't get killed off (at least not permanently). Movies don't. The DCEU has even done this by killing off Dick Grayson off screen. Dick Grayson lasted a long time in the comics, Dan Didio's obsession to kill him off aside.

Agreed. I hated everything about his Batman, and I have no interest in seeing him in a solo movie.

Ben Affleck is the best Batman who never got a solo movie.

Originally posted by riv6672
Ben Affleck is the best Batman who never got a solo movie.

Affleck probably did have the potential to be the best Batman, but that potential was unrealized due to Snyder/Whedon's terrible direction.

On that we agree.

Originally posted by riv6672
Ben Affleck is the best Batman who never got a solo movie.


He drinks too much, that is why

^^^Maybe Bale should have drank more, he might have been a better Batman!

Baleman:
-Better character arc
-Better at steath
- More believable as a vigilante
-Wealth is a disadvantage

Batfleck
-Better physique
-Better at intimidation
- More believable as a superhero
-Wealth is an advantage


Both have great gadgets and great Alfreds

Originally posted by riv6672
^^^Maybe Bale should have drank more, he might have been a better Batman!

nah coz fatfleck will win in drinking contests

WRONG FORUM